To provide continuity of child protection in Australia and ensure that Australian law is applied equally to all professionals for the protection of children regardless of religious rituals and beliefs.

To the Politicians of Australia,

We, the undersigned would like to address the recent comments of Frank Brennan on the ABC’s 7.30 Report last Tuesday, 17th July 2012 whilst being interviewed by reporter Leigh Sales on the subject of confession and his subsequent refusal to report any paedophiles that confess their crimes during the ritual of confession.  (http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2012/s3547935.htm)

Frank Brennan says “No matter what was confessed to me in confession I am not at liberty to disclose that to anybody. And yes, as a priest, I would agree to going to jail rather than to disclose what was revealed to me in confession.”  But that outside of confession he believes that “exactly the same legal obligation should apply to me as to you.”  So what gives him or the Catholic Church the right to act outside of our Australian laws with regards to his religious practice of confession?  In this case he is directly taking the law into his own hands, withholding information with the proviso that “in the Church now we have the Towards Healing protocols, and so if that was reported to me that someone within the Church had engaged in such behaviour then I could report that to authorities within the Church through the Towards Healing protocol and then they then have means of dealing with protocols with the police.” 

So basically if outside of the confessional Frank Brennan was to hear of some crime he would report to authorities within the Church – but the confessional remains impermeable to Church authorities or the Australian law and Australian authorities.  Is this really a plan that is going to lead to better protection for children against those who are unable to control compulsion to harm children?  Do the children of Australia not deserve a safer plan for their care and protection?

When it comes to the right to religious freedom and the right to justice and human rights, religious rights should not come first.  Laws reflect what a broad section of society considers acceptable and they are arrived at through a parliament of elected representatives and by the judiciary.  The “state” which in Australia aims to represent the views of the majority of it’s citizens has a greater “right” to set standards of behaviour of those citizens than a church or any denomination, particularly one that as in this case, has a long and involved history of the sexual abuse of children and the subsequent covering up and protecting of perpetrators. 

The involvement of the state in religious practices is clearly not needed where those practices are not harmful and are conducted with consent, but when those practices are clearly harmful (traditionally harmful religious practices have been directed at women in particular) and in this case potentially harmful to our most vulnerable (our children), then it is certainly the states job to prevent such harm from occurring. 

In a democracy such as ours with an elected state, it is the vast majority of people who consider the protection of paedophiles a horrific crime in its own right.  Frank Brennan not only is willing to conduct such a crime, but is also prepared to go to jail to protect the perpetrator of such horrific abuse of children in the name of a “religious RIGHT”.  Frank Brennan’s statements are clearly abhorrent and immoral.  To subsequently hold oneself up to society as a purveyor of morals and ethics is similarly abhorrent and so contradictory it would be dismissed as ridiculous if the results of such hypocrisy were not so devastating for so many.  

Only 25% of the population consider themselves “Catholic” according to the 2011 Census, only slightly more than those with no religion at all.  Frank Brennan’s position as a Catholic is far from a representative sample of the general population, even if all of those Catholics held similar views about the refusal to follow the law in the ritual of confession.

In a recent pole by Channel 9 closing on Wednesday, 18 July 2012 in answer to the question: Should priests report crimes admitted in the confessional?  86,062 respondents voted yes – that priests should report crimes admitted in the confessional.  This was a huge 77% of the total respondents.  Only 23% (25,737) voting no, that priests had the right to keep secrets about crimes committed against children.  (http://news.ninemsn.com.au/vote-archive.aspx)

When Frank Brennan’s position is viewed – legally, morally or ethically, there is and can be no justification for the protection of paedophiles and their behaviour, especially from an organisation and a body of workers (trusted with the care of children) that have a higher than average incidence of paedophiliac behaviour and pivotally have a history of form for the protection of paedophile perpetrators.  An aim to justify behaviour on the basis of religion and the right to practice a religion that has already demonstrated leads to the continuation of harmful and horrific crimes against children is clearly wrong.   Religion, particularly in our multi-faith society and the rapidly growing non-faith society, should be required by law to practice its rights and rituals within a wider context, and that includes what society at large considers morally acceptable behaviour.

Also important to note is the possibility that the confessor of such crimes to a priest may indicate feelings of guilt, and enough guilt to bring him to confession. This presents a real opportunity for the priest involved in the confession to assist not only the victims of the perpetrator by reporting the crimes, but to get some help for the confessor – notifying authorities will hopefully stop further crimes and resultant torment of future victims.  It is clear that the ritual of confession presents an opportunity for a priest to actually help a perpetrator of crime get help and to subsequently save more victims from suffering.

All professionals that work with children and people with distressing or criminal behaviours are subject to state regulation and work within professional codes of conduct.  This includes doctors, nurses, psychologists and of course teachers among others.  These professionals are given a privileged position in our society and if they were caught hiding or protecting paedophiliac behaviour they would quickly loss this privilege and be striped of their positions.  Of course this is the only right thing to do, as the protection of children from harm is highly valued by our society as a moral good.

Questions need to be asked in relation to the continuing attitude of the church – the Catholic Church in particular – and their expectation that they are outside of the laws of our land to which all other citizens are subject.  Why does the Catholic Church believe that the Vatican is somehow superior to our own countries laws?  And how can we as Australian’s sit back and accept this state of affairs when clearly the majority of Australian’s do see the immorality of withholding criminal evidence from the Australian authorities?

Curiously, the Catholic Church seems to continue to retain an unusual level of protection from authority figures in our society, and this protection provides an enormous amount of trust that is imbued in the work of a Priest.   Victorian Premier Ted Baillieu says “there is a powerful case to continue preserving the secrecy of the Catholic confessional.” (http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=8500840)  For this reason alone, priests should understand their duty of care when given such a role, and that it does not only apply to the bits of the legal framework that they like, but they are expected, and trusted, to follow the same laws to which we are all subject.   Questions must also be asked about why the Catholic Church is offered such protection in our society, when so many children have been harmed by their failed attempts to do the right thing because basically they backed the wrong side.  When it should have been the children that they protected, they choice to protect, forgive and rehome the paedophile priests so that they may continue to offend.

Given the on-going and historical contempt the Catholic Church has shown and continues to show for their victims, and the legal framework they are expected to operate within, it is indeed up to the state to ensure Australian law is applied to all citizens equally so that we can ensure continuity of child protection in Australia.  For too long the state has turned a blind eye to the Catholic Church’s failed attempts to deal with crime.  The idea that the Catholic Church is a suitable organisation to be any sort of moral guide for the general population is surely now bordering on the ridiculous.  The state has the power and the support to take decisive action on this whole terrible issue, it is time that they did.

The Catholic Church fails to address crimes with morality or competency.  They openly defy our Australian law.  They continue to gain the respect and support of authority figures in our society.  They continue to leave a trail of destruction behind them as more and more survivors of child sexual abuse at the hands of priests come out and express their pain, loss and claim some right to justice.  The majority of Australians can see clearly the moral action that needs to be taken.  It is time now for action to be taken.  We are all supportive of a Royal Commission.  The state needs to act and right the wrongs that the Catholic Church has again and again demonstrated their incompetency to address.

We are looking forward to your reply and action on this sensitive and important matter.  This issue is pivotal for human rights, justice and moral leadership in Australian.

Putting our trust in your care,

 

CC Frank Brennan

CC Media outlets of Australia

CC The Clergy of Australia