Pushed by a royal commission report to implement reforms, they recently reverted to standard operating procedures of delay and secrecy in suppressing a major report on governance reform.

While hoping to delay and control discussion, the bishops were outmanoeuvred by the leaking of the highly significant report. It will now be available to and discussed by all Catholics - as it should be.

Titled The Light from the Southern Cross: Promoting Co-Responsible Governance in the Catholic Church in Australia, the report deserves serious consideration - but by refusing to release it until at least November, the bishops displayed their usual disposition to not trust their people, to keep them in the dark and assign to themselves the sole right to consider and comment on the contents.

The report is the outcome of a royal commission recommendation that called for a review of the governance, leadership and management structures of dioceses and parishes, including issues of transparency, accountability, consultation and the participation of lay men and women.

The report provides an important analysis of why current arrangements are not fit-for-purpose and outlines how the church can operate in ways that are faithful to its calling, respect the dignity of its members and are consistent with the reasonable expectations of modern society for inclusiveness, transparency and accountability.

Confronted with the overwhelming demand for reform it seems the bishops panicked and reverted to their old habits.

All Catholics and the wider Australian community have a legitimate interest here so that effective and appropriate mechanisms in which the community can have confidence can be implemented.

Culturally, the focus of the review is closely related to the issue of clericalism, which the royal commission and Pope Francis have been explicit in stating lies at the root of many of the failures of the church and the perversion of its mission.

The review panel took the initiative in having international experts review and offer perspectives on its likely findings and recommendations.

The report was keenly awaited by Catholics in Australia and globally.

It breaks new ground in articulating a way forward - an Australian model of church that has universal application.

Such issues challenge many in the church, none more so than the current crop of Australian bishops.

In many ways the report gets to the nub of the need for real reform, and addresses the cultural challenges in implementing a model church that is open, accountable, non-clerical and inclusive.

For some time now the bishops have promised it will no longer be "business as usual" in the administration of the church and their role in considering the need for change.

Catholics and others might want to believe such commitments, but unfortunately they can't.

This most recent episode simply underscores that sad fact. It is particularly perverse that on the topic of "co-responsible governance", which goes to the heart of transparency and accountability, the bishops chose to send a message that they don't much value or want the views of Australian Catholics, and sought to completely control any discussion.

On this occasion, their little scheme has been sprung, and rightly all Catholics will be able to read and comment on the report.

By defending their outdated instincts for secrecy, the bishops cling to an arrogant operating style.

If Catholics or other Australians doubt this, they only have to read Malcolm Turnbull's account in his recent memoir of how Sydney Archbishop Anthony Fisher, shamelessly and contrary to all public commitments, conceded that the bishops do allocate Commonwealth education funds in ways that suit their own agendas.

It is a revelation breathtaking in its duplicity.

Little wonder then that Canberra's Archbishop, Christopher Prowse, wrote recently that demands for transparency and accountability are part of "society's aggressive secularism".

It seems openness and accountability are things to be feared and best avoided.

The work and report of the royal commission have been pivotal in generating internal momentum on church reform.

There is ample scope for both people and bishops to walk this journey together.

It is a case of trust-building trust.

There is little doubt that the review of church governance would not have happened were it not a key recommendation of an inquiry that shone a searching light into the fetid darkness of church hierarchy, culture and the perverted loyalties that dishonoured its mission and people.

The legitimate pressure of the Australian community and governments has been critical in this process and properly needs to continue, to ensure all Australians can be confident that necessary reforms are implemented.

The governance review is part of a broader initiative, led by Brisbane's Archbishop and president of the Australian Bishops Conference, Mark Coleridge, for a Plenary Council to consider the overall position of the church in Australia.

To his credit, Coleridge prevailed in promoting this idea against the natural instincts of a sizeable number of his colleagues.

A major consultative process, held over the past 18 months involving more than 17,000 submissions from individuals and groups, demonstrated strong buy-in from ordinary Catholics. An official summary of the inputs reached an unavoidable conclusion that most want serious and significant change and have little confidence in their bishops.

It was also clear that Australian Catholics are fed up with secrecy and a lack of accountability.

The governance report is even more powerful because there is fertile ground among ordinary Catholics for such reforms.

In the final analysis, ordinary Catholics are the church - and they are demanding shared leadership and control. But many clerics, and particularly the bishops, are of a different mind.

Confronted with the overwhelming demand for reform it seems the bishops panicked and reverted to their old habits.

This is evident not just in the suppression of the governance report but also the brutal way they stacked the composition of six discernment groups, whose task was to prepare position papers that will frame the agenda for the formal Plenary sessions.

These documents have now been released, and there is tentative evidence that, perhaps despite the efforts of some, the reform issues raised by ordinary Catholics are still in the mix.

This highlights the fact that the bishops seem to be coming slowly to accepting that major change is irresistible.

Although the message from the people to the bishops in the first stage of the Plenary Council consultations was a very emphatic "we don't trust our bishops", that lack of trust can be bridged by the bishops recognising the richness and faith in the input their people have provided.

There is ample scope for both people and bishops to walk this journey together.

It is a case of trust-building trust.

In 2018, Pope Francis wrote a "Letter to the People of God" - in other words, ordinary Catholics.

In it he called for their help in ridding the church of sexual abuse and clericalism.

Francis asked Catholics to be "active and assertive" in helping him to reform the church.

The implication, and the none-too-subtle conclusion, to draw was that Francis doubted that many of his leadership team, and local bishops, were up to the task.

So, he asked ordinary Catholics to support his push for reform from the grassroots.

It is significant that the Australian hierarchy effectively ignored the Pope's letter - a surprising and damning outcome that only confirmed the Pope's assessment.

Rather than working openly with their people as Francis encourages, the Australian bishops still resort to secrecy and control, old habits they need to leave behind.

The quality of the governance report, the product of a highly qualified but mainly non-clerical panel, should make the bishops start to trust their own people. Otherwise they may find themselves offside with the Pope and abandoned by most Australian Catholics.

• Terry Fewtrell is involved with Concerned Catholics of Canberra-Goulburn. This article first appeared on johnmenadue.com

If implemented, the wide-ranging recommendations would reshape the administrative and financial control of dioceses and parishes. These controls would be reallocated between the clergy and laypeople, with an increased role for women.

Last month Australia's bishops considered the report, "The Light from the Southern Cross: Promoting Co-Responsible Governance in the Catholic Church in Australia."

The 86-recommendation report was the work of the Implementation Advisory Group's Governance Review Project Team. It was initiated by the Australian Catholic Bishops' Conference (ACBC) a year ago.

It responds to a key recommendation of Australia's landmark Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse.

The governance report was written by 14 people, handpicked lay and clergy and women — from Australia as well as international experts.

The report had originally been delivered to the Australian bishops in early May and kept confidential to allow the prelates time to digest its contents.

However, it was leaked to La Croix International on June 1.

A spokesman for the bishops said: "The version that has been published is not the final document."

"One of the reasons for the delay of the report's release was the need for some corrections and clarifications. That process has commenced and is likely to take several weeks."

"There is also a need to discern how and when various recommendations might best be considered, not least in light of the upcoming assemblies of the Plenary Council."

Two of the report's authors say any changes would be minor tweaks.

The report recommends bishops would be required to have a 'college of consultors'.

These consultors would include laymen as well as laywomen. They would be consulted on appointments and finances. In addition, bishops would be required to consult with independent subject matter experts when appropriate.

Dioceses and parishes would have to establish pastoral councils and introduce more transparency. This will include regularly auditing finances and child safeguards. Bishops' conference would be required to make the process of selecting bishops transparent.

"The absence of public consultation, together with the opaqueness of the selection process, leaves all but the select few consulted in the dark and calls into question its efficacy," the report says of the current process.

Source

• UCA News
• National Catholic Reporter
• Image: Crux Now

Pell says the Commission's views "are not supported by the evidence".

The Commission's findings were made public in 2017. However, a court redacted the report because Pell was facing child abuse charges at the time.

The unredacted chapters of the findings were not made public until late Thursday. They find Pell knowingly being involved in the movement of a relentless abuser, of failing to recommend the removal of another and not doing sufficient to deal with a third criminal clergyman.

In particular, the Commission has dismissed Pell's long-stated defence that he did not know about the actions of the recidivist abuser, Gerald Risdale in Ballarat.

Ridsdale committed more than 130 offences against children as young as four between the 1960s and 1980s.

Now in prison, as recently as April he was charged with additional historical sexual abuse offences.

Pell's involvement was as a relatively junior priest: he was one of the "consultors" of then Ballarat Bishop, Ronald Mulkearns. "Consultors" are a small group of priests the bishop consults regarding diocesan appointments and movement of priests around the bishop's diocese.

Pell maintains Mulkearns did not give the true reason for moving Risdale and that Mulkearns lied in not giving the true reason to the consultors.

The Royal Commission differs and does not accept that Mulkearns lied to his consultors.

"Cardinal Pell's evidence that ‘paedophilia was not mentioned' and that the ‘true' reason was not given is not accepted. It is 'implausible' given the matters set out above that Bishop Mulkearns did not inform those at the meeting of at least complaints of sexual abuse of children having been made."

The Commission accepted that Mulkearns made the final decision to shift Ridsdale to another parish to avoid scandal and called Mulkearns recurring practice an "extraordinary and inexcusable failure" and "appalling conduct".

However, the Commission went on to find that Pell and the other consultors failed to advise against the Mulkerns proposal.

The Commission labelled Pell and the other consultors failure to act as "unacceptable".

Cardinal Pell in his testimony to the Royal Commission was critical of Mulkearns and another priest responsible for earlier appointing Ridsdale to the small parish of Inglewood when they knew of allegations of child sexual abuse against him.

The finding means that Cardinal Pell was aware of allegations of sexual abuse against Ridsdale at least a decade before Ridsdale's offending was investigated by police and possibly earlier. The Commission noted it would be "surprised" if Mulkearns deceived Cardinal Pell at a 1977 College of Consultors meeting when Ridsdale's appointment to the Edenhope parish was discussed.

In other instances of alleged neglect of victims in the Ballarat diocese, the Commission accepted Pell's testimony.

The most serious allegation is that Pell offered to bribe David Risdale to take allegations of sexual abuse again his uncle, Gerald Risdale, to a church hearing rather than the Police.

"I never impeded or discouraged anyone from going to the Police," he told the Royal Commission.

The Royal Commission found that in two other instances, Cardinal Pell was falsely accused by otherwise honest witnesses in apparent cases of mistaken identity.

Sources

• SMH
• The Australian

The current plan was designed to limit financial damage to the Church by having clergy sex abuse survivors sign away their rights to sue the Church.

Known as the Melbourne Response, compensation payments were initially capped at $50,000 when Cardinal George Pell devised the scheme in 1996.

Payments were later raised to $75,000. However, victims had to to sign a deed of settlement waiving their right to take civil action against the Catholic Archdiocese of Melbourne.

A spokesperson for the archdiocese says, despite this deed, the archdiocese has provided "additional redress payments totalling $11.07 million based on a cap of $150,000 to 233 survivors of child sexual abuse".

These survivors include those whose claims were previously accepted by the Melbourne Response and who received compensation under previous caps.

Although the deed of settlement has not so far been challenged in the state of Victoria (of which Melbourne is the capital), some victims in other Australian states have received hundred-fold increases in payouts after judges set aside their deed of settlement with the church.

But that number could increase. Victoria's state government is considering following the states of Queensland and Western Australia in providing blanket relief to survivors who have signed so-called releases from liability for the Church.

If it were to do this, survivors would be free to sue for further damages, which would in turn see payouts from the archdiocese climb considerably higher.

Observers have noted in some other states, these payments have increased one hundred-fold.

Australia's Royal Commission into Child Abuse recommended a maximum payout to victims of $200,000. The National Redress Scheme currently limits payouts to $150,000, but a parliamentary inquiry has recommended this be changed to $200,000.

The Australian Catholic Bishops' Conference backed the $200,000 figure in its submission to the parliamentary inquiry.

Source

• Crux
• Image: Irish Times

We are unlikely as a Church or as a society to get this right for quite some years to come.

Unlike the apology to the stolen generations or the apology for forced adoptions, this apology will be delivered in the hope that those from institutions which have done wrong stay away or at least not be publicly identifiable.

The government website states:

'The national apology is a day for survivors, families and supporters.

"Community consultations have made it clear that representatives from institutions in official attire risk traumatising survivors.

"Accordingly, institutions will not be represented at the national apology in Canberra.

"Members of institutions who wish to attend apology events in their personal capacity as a survivor, or as a support person to a survivor, are respectfully asked to not wear a uniform or any clothing that identifies their institution."

So let's continue to feel shame as members of the Church and let's recommit to justice, truth and healing.

As we look at our church structures and the past cover ups or downplaying of abuse that occurred, let's take to heart Jesus' words in today's gospel (Mark chapter 10 verses 35-45):

'You know that those who are recognised as rulers over the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones make their authority over them felt.

But it shall not be so among you.

Rather, whoever wishes to be great among you will be your servant; whoever wishes to be first among you will be the slave of all.'

We are fortunate that our bishops finally agreed to release the reports of our Truth Justice and Healing Council.

One of those reports contained personal testimonies by members of the Council.

This evening, I would like to quote from just four of those testimonies. I will not quote any bishop. I will not quote any man. Let me just quote from four of the women on the council.

Maria Harries, who is a professor of social work and the chair of my board at Catholic Social Services Australia, said:

'I still need to be convinced that the structures of the church implicated in their permitting of such abuse and the protection of perpetrators will really reform itself. Change is obligatory, and it is differentially confronting and frightening for various elements of our church. The recognition of the problems we face as a church is a good start to finding solutions.'

Marian Sullivan, a child psychiatrist, said:

'The royal commission has challenged many parts of Australian society and its institutions.

"The Catholic Church has been scrutinised extensively and critiqued harshly.

"As a member of the Council I have moved from a disposition of disappointment with the Church to one of satisfaction that the Church represented by the Council has unflinchingly faced the shame of its past behaviour and any inadequacies of redress.

"Although not widely acknowledged, the cooperation that the Council gave to the royal commission has been exemplary and is proof of our resolve.'

Maree Marsh, a Brigidine Sister and psychologist, said:

'The church cannot undo all of the harm done in the past, but it has the responsibility to do all that is within its power to create an environment in which people will treat other people with respect, dignity and justice.

"The healing that is necessary involves a long process and will take courage, compassion, openness and patience.

"Above all it will take faith — faith in one another and faith that God is with us in this journey.'

This evening whether victim, relative, bystander, or church official we can all identify with the suffering servant in Isaiah (Isaiah chapter 53 verses10-11):

The Lord was pleased to crush him in infirmity.

If he gives his life as an offering for sin, he shall see his descendants in a long life, and the will of the Lord shall be accomplished through him.

'Because of his affliction he shall see the light in fullness of days; through his suffering, my servant shall justify many, and their guilt he shall bear.'

May the Lord have mercy on us all.

May the day come when church officials and victims will be comfortable in each other's presence in our Parliament even if not in our Church.

But let's dare to pray that all might belong both in the galleries of our Parliament and in the pews of our Church seeing the light in fullness of days.

• Fr Frank Brennan SJ is the CEO of Catholic Social Services Australia. A former professor of law at Australian Catholic University and Adjunct Professor at the Australian Centre for Christianity and Culture the above text is taken from is his homily for the 29th Sunday in Ordinary Time, Holy Trinity Catholic Church, Curtin.
• Originally published in Eureka Street. Republished with permission of author.

Leaders of Catholic Religious Australia (CRA) and the Australian Catholic Bishops released a statement after the prime minister's address to parliament saying:

""The National Apology today and the apologies made by institutions during the life of the Royal Commission and since have been an important validation of the courage of survivors of abuse in seeking truth, justice, and healing." Read more

On the day that the Australian Catholic Bishops Conference and Catholic Religious Australia formally responded to the Royal Commission's final report, comments by Australian Catholic University Vice-Chancellor Professor Greg Craven are contained in the simultaneously released four-volume final report from the TJHC.

"I am deeply concerned that the Royal Commission largely lost sight of the goal of restorative justice in both its hearings and its report," Prof Craven wrote, describing his contribution to the report as "an avowedly personal account".

He was the only council member not to endorse the final TJHC report, which, from its introduction, accepts that "the Royal Commission has laid bare the extensive history of the Church in the sexual abuse of children in its institutions and of the devastating failure of the Church to put the interests and the protection of children and vulnerable people first".

"An almost inevitable conclusion is that too many of those who were in a position to protect children instead looked to the preservation of the reputation of the organisation and thus to the shielding of perpetrators," the report said.

"The lives of victims and of their families and loved ones have been devastated by the effects of clerical sexual abuse and that must be, and remain, at the forefront of the Church's thinking and actions as it tries to come to grips with the tragedy and to deliver justice to those who have been harmed while in its care."

However Prof Craven's criticism is largely levelled at the way the Royal Commission was conducted and its focus on churches, particularly the Catholic Church.

"This was a lawyers' Royal Commission, and its overwhelming reliance on changes to civil litigation and raw compensation reveals the narrow obsession of lawyers with crude monetary solutions," Prof Craven wrote.

"I am deeply concerned for the future of victims with life-long mental health issues, which cannot be addressed simply through the once-off award of damages or redress."

Prof Craven criticised the Royal Commission report for "its reliance upon ill-defined concepts like ‘clericalism' as a short-hand charge sheet that can be deployed to substantiate virtually any accusation or ground any negative finding".

"Similarly, the Royal Commission proved itself overwhelmingly ready to draw links between child abuse and such practices as celibacy by processes of reasoning that were tendentious and unconvincing," he wrote.

Tempering his criticism, Prof Craven described his own witness of the Royal Commission and the work of the council.

"… No experience will ever surpass the realisation of the extent of the horror that had been perpetrated within my Church and upon its members," he said.

"The extent of abuse, and the numbers of perpetrators, and the failure of authority was - almost - beyond belief.

"Yet alongside this awful reality was an appreciation that for many long-term critics of the Catholic Church, all this was as much an opportunity as a tragedy. You Catholics, they said, are nothing but child-abusers.

"For me, this is abuse of the abused. Who were the victims of Catholic sexual abuse but other Catholics? These victims are - or were - people I know, I like, I love.

"As a Catholic, I do not hang my head in shame. I share in some small way the enormous anger of victims toward those who perverted their part of the mission of our Church." Continue reading

• Professor Greg Craven is Vice-Chancellor of the Australian Catholic University
• Image: Catholic Leader

"We don't believe it will make children safer, and in certain cases, we think it could make children less safe.

Any suggestion that a perpetrator may, in fact, confess is removed all but certainly by the imposition of a law such as this."

He was speaking after the publication of The Australian Catholic Bishops Conference and Catholic Religious Australia's Response to the Royal Commission into Institutional Child Sexual Abuse.

In the response, the bishops and religious said they agree with 98 percent of the recommendations and are committed to safeguarding children and vulnerable people, but they are adamant the confessional seal is inviolable.

The Royal Commission had recommended the bishops consult with the Holy See to clarify whether "information received from a child during the sacrament of reconciliation that they have been sexually abused is covered by the seal of confession."

The report labelled the suggestion of removing the seal of the confession as "inimical to religious liberty," not just for the Catholic Church but for other religions as well.

The Response states: "Children will be less rather than more safe if mandatory reporting of confessions were required: the rare instance where a perpetrator or victim might have raised this in confession would be less likely to occur if confidence in the sacramental seal were undermined; and so an opportunity would be lost to encourage a perpetrator to self-report to civil authorities or victims to seek safety."

Two of Australia's eight states and territories have introduced laws making it a crime for priests to withhold information about abuse heard in the confessional, while the others have said they are considering their response.

This means priests are required by law in those states to report abuse to the police when they hear about it in confession.

Source

• The Tablet
• Aljazeera
• CruxNow
• Image: YouTube

The Royal Commission, which was established last December, heard Robert Clancy had taken five years to admit he had a family relationship with the principles of Australian Family Network, to which the CSF had paid $2 million for consultancy and other services.

Another conflict between Clancy and the Australian Family Network was not disclosed until last month, when it emerged that the owner of Australian Family Network is Robert's brother, Paul.

The relationship pertained to Australian Family Network and Paul Clancy Pty Ltd.

The Royal Commission heard Clancy disclosed confidential information about the superannuation fund to Paul, and the two communicated via email about business matters as recently as 29 May this year.

In some cases the brothers approved payments despite a decision in 2010 that only chief executive Frank Pegan would deal with the Australian Family Network.

Robert Clancy is on leave from the CSF while the matter is being investigated and his company credit card has been suspended.

The deputy chairman of CSF, Peter Haysey, told the Royal Commission the Australian Family Network and Clancy had provided services to CSF with respect to growing member numbers.

He said there were a number of different elements of the relationships in circumstances where CSF had identified the early education space as a potential growth area.

Haysey agreed that Clancy should have disclosed the family relationship earlier in the process and that substantial amounts had been paid before that disclosure was made in May 2015.

The Royal Commission was told that $1.5 million had been paid by CSF with respect to consultancy services and $500,000 relating to the fund's sponsorship of the Early Education and Child Care Awards.

Haysey also told the Royal Commission that a policy on the use of corporate cards had been breached at CSF and unauthorised expenses of $46,000 were made on Robert Clancy's card between 2013 and 2016.

These expenses have since been repaid but there may be more. Staff have long been allowed to make personal purchases on their corporate cards and then repay the money.

An independent review into the matter has been commissioned by CSF and will be completed by the end of this month.

Source

• Financial Review
• Money Management
• Investment Magazine
• Image: Freedman & Gopalan Solicitors

In his view the government needs to further consider 24 of the recommendations made by the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse.

He says of the commission's recommendations, the Victoria government has accepted 128 and agreed another 165 in principle.

Pakula also says, rather than individual states making decisions about breaking the seal of confession, a "degree of national agreement" is needed.

Various decisions have been made by Australia's state governments about the Royal Commission's recommendations.

As an example, the Australian Capital Territory, South Australia and Tasmania have already adopted laws making it illegal for priests to fail to report the confession of a child sex abuse crime.

However, as from October, in South Australia, priests who fail to report child sex abuse confessions will face a $7,400 fine.

In New South Wales, the state government is putting extra thought into the royal commission's confessional seal recommendation.

It says this is a complex issue which it has referred to "the Council of Attorneys-General for national consideration."

The Catholic Church in Australia has opposed laws mandating reporting from the confessional. Many priests have said they would go to jail before violating the seal.

The Code of Canon Law says "The sacramental seal is inviolable; therefore it is absolutely forbidden for a confessor to betray in any way a penitent in words or in any manner and for any reason."

Priests who intentionally violate the seal are automatically excommunicated.

In addition, the Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches: "Every priest who hears confessions is bound under severe penalties to keep absolute secrecy regarding the sins that his penitents have confessed to him," due to the "delicacy and greatness of this ministry and the respect due to persons."

Source

• CruxNow
• The Canberra Times
• Image: The Catholic Leader

The seal of Confession

In a statement, the NZCBC says Confession is often not understood.

"In many cases, the one making a confession remains unidentified," they say.

"In any case, as has been said by members of the Church in Australia, we note that there is no evidence to suggest that abolition of the seal of confession would genuinely make environments safer for children."

The NZCBC says the integrity of the Church's sacraments can sit easily alongside the robust, professionally supervised safeguarding policies the Church puts in place to protect children.

In New Zealand, the Catholic Church has also adopted Guidelines for the Prevention of and Response to Sexual Abuse in the Catholic Church in Aotearoa New Zealand.

The guidelines set out the New Zealand Catholic Church's commitment to safeguarding children and vulnerable adults.

They apply to all dioceses, religious orders and Catholic agencies.

The guidelines look at such things as safe recruitment and safe practice of those working with children or vulnerable adults.

The bishops say their understanding is that any legal move by a government to impose mandatory reporting by health professionals of clients who have abused children becomes a hotly-debated and contested issue.

"Many health professionals argue that client confidentiality is a crucial factor in helping reduce child abuse, as it enables those at risk of abusing to seek the necessary professional help.

"That professional position warrants very careful consideration."

Priestly celibacy

The New Zealand bishops question the claim made by the royal commission that optional celibacy might have a positive impact on reducing potential child abuse has not been proven.

"No scientific research we are aware of suggests that those abusing adults happen to be celibates."

The New Zealand bishops point out that priestly celibacy is an ancient tradition in the Catholic Church and in other faith and spiritual communities too.

But they acknowledge that in other contexts in the Church, celibacy is being discussed and this is happening with Pope Francis' knowledge.

Source

• Supplied: Amanda Gregan Communications Advisor - NZ Catholic Bishops Te Huinga o nga Pihopa Katorika o Aotearoa
• radionz.co.nz
• Image: catholicnewsagency.com L'Osservatore Romano.

   

The priests are responding to South Australia's decision to join the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) to create laws to force Catholic priests to break the seal of confession, to report paedophiles to police.

The new laws, which will come into effect in South Australia in October, will see priests who fail to report child abuse to Police facing fines of up to A$10,000 (£5,600).

Bishop Greg O'Kelly, Acting Adelaide Archbishop, says while politicians can change the law, "we can't change the nature of the confessional, which is a sacred encounter between a penitent and someone seeking forgiveness and a priest representing Christ."

Changing the law doesn't affect priests who have "an understanding of the seal of confession that is in the area of the sacred," he says.

"Canon law lays down that 'it is absolutely forbidden for a confessor to betray in any way a penitent in words or in any manner and for any reason'"

O'Kelly says the church was not made aware of the change, which was legislated last year, until last Thursday.

The new law forms part of the South Australian government's response to the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sex Abuse.

The New South Wales Government says it will respond later this month about whether priests would be legally obliged to report confessions of child sex abuse.

"The state will be requiring us as Catholic priests to commit what we regard as the most serious crime and I'm not willing to do that," says Father Michael Whelan, the parish priest in St Patrick's Church Hill in Sydney.

"I expect every jurisdiction in Australia now will follow that recommendation and I expect the Church throughout will simply not observe it."

Whelan says while the Church is not above the law, if the state intervenes on religious freedom and undermines "the essence of what it means to be a Catholic, we will resist.

"The only way they [the state] would be able to see whether the law was being observed or not is to try and entrap priests," he says.

Source

• ABC
• The Tablet
• Image: Catholic Herald

Priests are not using the seal of confession to protect child abusers.

Removing a priest's legal protection will not make children safer, Coleridge says.

While he agrees children's safety is paramount, he says safety measures must be realistic and effective.

Australia's Royal Commission into Child Abuse recommendations are being adopted by a number of Australian states.

These recommendations could see priests facing criminal charges for failing to report child abuse revealed in confession.

Coleridge said the royal commission did not find a systemic problem with the sacrament of penance in terms of child safety.

"Priests from a range of different backgrounds and pastoral experiences have said the sacrament isn't being abused to protect those who commit crimes against children.

"The church doesn't want to protect criminals. It wants children to be safe from them."

The church wants measures that will genuinely make environments safer for children, he says.

"There's nothing to suggest that legal abolition of the seal will help in that regard."

Coleridge says the church does not view the sacramental seal as incompatible with maintaining child safety.

However, the royal commission saw the matter differently.

It had heard the testimonies of more than 8,000 survivors of child sex abuse. Of those who were abused in religious institutions, 62 percent were Catholics.

It found the sacrament of reconciliation (penance) was a factor that contributed to both the occurrence of child sexual abuse in the Catholic Church and to the church's inadequate response to the abuse.

New South Wales (NSW), the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) and South Australia (SA) have either extended their mandatory reporting laws or introduced new failure-to-report offences. The ACT and SA laws include confessions.

In SA the confessional would not be exempt from the reporting law coming into effect in October. Breaches of the law will attract a maximum $10,000 fine.

In NSW, failure to report offences will apply to clergy and ministers of religion. Failure to report offences will attract up to two years' jail. The government says the religious confession privilege comes under uniform evidence law that applies in multiple jurisdictions.

Other royal commission recommendations include:

• reporting to police any child abuse disclosed during Catholic confession
• the Australian Catholic Church seeking permission from the Vatican to introduce voluntary celibacy for the clergy.

Source

• Crux Now
• 9 News
• The Catholic Leader
• Image: Wikipedia

In an initial response to the report, a Vatican Press Office released a statement saying the report is a thorough effort that "deserves to be studied seriously."

It reiterated the commitment of the Holy See to be close to the Church in Australia as it responds to the sex abuse crisis.

Archbishop Denis Hart of Melbourne, the Australian Catholic Bishops Conference president, offered the bishops' unconditional apology for the suffering that had been caused.

He gave a commitment to ensuring justice for those affected.

Hart said the bishops would take the royal commission's recommendations seriously and present them to the Holy See.

He said many of the panel's recommendations would have a significant impact on the way the Catholic Church operates in Australia.

However, the archbishop took issue with the recommendation that the seal of the confession should not apply to allegations or canonical disciplinary processes relating to child sexual abuse.

He said the seal of confession cannot be broken, even if priests face the prospect of criminal charges for failing to report child sexual abuse.

"I revere the law of the land and I trust it, but this is a sacred spiritual charge before God which I must honour, and I have to respect and try to do what I can with both."

Hart said if a person confessed "those heinous crimes" to him he would refuse them absolution until they went to the authorities.

He said if a child came to him and told him they had been molested, he would see the conversation move outside the confessional and take them to a parent or teacher to see that the allegations were reported.

Hart said he will make sure bishops pass that recommendation suggesting voluntary celibacy on to the Holy See who will make the decision.

While he said he believed there were benefits to the vow of celibacy, he admitted it was a difficult undertaking.

Sydney Archbishop Anthony Fisher said he stood ready to address systemic issues behind the abuse.

He said he was appalled by the sinful and criminal activity of some members of the clergy and ashamed by the response of church leaders.

Perth Archbishop Timothy Costelloe said there will be no easy dismissal of people's stories, no sweeping of things under the carpet, no cover-ups.

The recommendations to the Catholic church include:

• Parish priests are not to be the employers of principals and teachers in Catholic schools.
• The Australian Catholic Bishops Conference should request the Holy See to amend canon law so that the pontifical secret [the seal of confession] does not apply to any aspect of allegations or canonical disciplinary processes relating to child sexual abuse.
• The Australian Catholic Bishops Conference should request the Holy See to publish criteria for the selection of bishops including relating to the promotion of child safety.
• The Australian Catholic Bishops Conference should establish a transparent process for appointing bishops which includes the direct participation of lay people.
• The Australian Catholic Bishops Conference request the Holy See to consider introducing voluntary celibacy for diocesan clergy.
• All Catholic religious institutes in Australia, in consultation with their international leadership and the Holy See as required, implement measures to address the risks of harm to children and the potential psychological and sexual dysfunction associated with a celibate rule of religious life.
• This should include consideration of whether and how existing models of religious life could be modified to facilitate alternative forms of association, shorter terms of celibate commitment, and/or voluntary celibacy (where that is consistent with the form of association that has been chosen.
• The Australian Catholic Bishops Conference and all Catholic religious institutes in Australia should further develop, regularly evaluate and continually improve their processes for selecting, screening and training of candidates for the clergy and religious life, and their processes of ongoing formation, support and supervision of clergy and religious.
• The Australian Catholic Bishops Conference and Catholic Religious of Australia should establish a national protocol for screening candidates before and during seminary and religious formation, as well as before ordination and the profession of religious vows.

More

• Click here to read all 15 recommendations made to the Catholic Church
• Click here to go to the Commission's Official Website
• Click here for the full report
• Listen to Fr Neil Vaney talking on Sunday Morning about seal of confession

Source

• Vatican News
• New York Times
• RNZ
• SBS
• The Guardian
• Child Abuse Royal Commission
• Image: AAP

It also heard the priests should have had ongoing formation and supervision.

Diocese of Broken Bay vicar general Dr David Ranson also told the Royal Commission the changes in priestly formation over the last three decades need to acknowledge the failures of the past.

"I think there will be no movement forward until we can not only implicitly acknowledge the liabilities of the past but actually publicly acknowledge that this was wrong and that this was just distorted," he said.

Commissioner Robert Fitzgerald questioned whether the changes meant the church recognised there were deep failures in past approaches and that seminary life was unhealthy in the 1950s, '60s and '70s.

Archdiocese of Sydney Auxiliary Bishop Anthony Randazzo said the church recognised the failures.

"I think there is an acknowledgement that there were aspects of the formation in the past that were not as good as they could have been and that they did contribute to the shortcomings within this area that we're talking about," he told the Sydney hearing on Monday.

Bishop Randazzo, a former seminary rector, said there were holes in formation in the past but there was a deliberate change in teaching, including no longer taking children into minor seminaries.

The Royal Commission was set up to examine the Institutional responses to child sexual abuse to inquire into the current policies and procedures of Catholic Church authorities in Australia in relation to child-protection and child-safety standards, including responding to allegations of child sexual abuse.

Source

• 7 News
• 9 News
• Royal Commission in Institutional Responses into Child Sexual Abuse
• Image: www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au

This is a record that has already prompted other inquiries here and overseas.

It would indeed be wrong to ignore the failings of other churches and secular institutions as recent events in Britain have revealed, most notably, the lax performance of the BBC in the scandalous behaviour of their pin-up star, Jimmy Savile over decades of impunity in abusing children.

The tentacles of this scandal have reached to a variety of other secular institutions, including children's homes and hospitals. The terms of the Australian inquiry , as announced by the federal government, have reasonably addressed such concerns by including institutions other than the Catholic Church in the Commission's remit. Closed institutional power over the vulnerable, wherever it exists, is a key factor in the perpetuation of abusive conditions.

Even so, the Catholic Church has and continues to have major problems dealing with this issue of clerical sexual abuse, and virtually every day produces new evidence in a variety of countries, not only of abuse by clergy, but of negligence, cover-up, concealment, and deceit that have contributed to dreadful injustice to victims.

Significantly, these problems have combined with other tensions and stresses within the church to expose an even deeper crisis in the church's structures and doctrines, and have contributed to a broad disaffection of laity and significant sections of the clergy with the church's leadership and its exercise of authority. In Ireland, for example, the previous widespread attitudes of respect and deference towards church authorities and institutions have almost entirely disappeared, conspicuously amongst the young, but even dramatically amongst the older generations.

The sex abuse crisis has crystallised for many Catholics an alienation from church structures and authority that began with the papal encyclical Humanae Vitae of 1968 reasserting the standard ban on artificial contraception. Continue reading

Sources

• Tony Coady in The Conversation
• Image: The Australian

Tony Coady is Professor of Philosophy at the University of Melbourne. He is a Catholic.