Make celibacy optional for priests, Australia's child sex abuse commission says in landmark report

Australia’s royal commission into child sex abuse has recommended that celibacy for Catholic priests should be optional and the sanctity of the confessional should be abandoned, as it ended an historic five-year inquiry that exposed horrific cases of abuse and cover-ups.

Releasing a landmark seventeen-volume report after holding thousands of occasionally emotional and harrowing hearings, the commission said the handling of child sex abuse in Australia had been a “national tragedy”.

"Tens of thousands of children have been sexually abused in many Australian institutions," the report said.

"We will never know the true number. It is not a case of a few 'rotten apples'. Society's major institutions have seriously failed."

The commission said the highest number of alleged perpetrators and abused children were in Catholic institutions but it also exposed widespread abuse in other religious organisations, as well as sports and community groups, schools and charities.

“Australian society must never go back to a state of denial about the nature, cause and impact of child sexual abuse in institutional contexts," the report said.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/12/15/make-celibacy-optional-priestsaustralias-child-sex-abuse-commission/

Wolfie wont believe that, it's only Brits who abuse children, such as Mountbatten, General Slim ect !

AS Shady would say HA HA HA HA ...........

nicko wrote:Wolfie wont believe that,     it's only Brits who abuse children,   such as Mountbatten,   General Slim ect !

         AS Shady would say HA HA HA HA ...........

Don't be ridiculous, nicko...

Neither veya nor myself have ever denied what has happened over here --  on the contrary, we have both mentioned this Royal Commission several times over the last couple of years..

What is unique about the situation in Britain is the way that your guvm't keeps on refusing to even begin its' own enquiry --  while at the same time the British "establishment" is working overtime to keep on protecting and defending its own.

The enquiries began in Boston a couple of decades back (as portrayed in the movie 'Spotlight'..), followed by Ireland (who finished their enquiry eleven years ago --  but they are still debating how to proceed on those recommendations  !!! ),  while Canada and NZ also have some enquiries ongoing..

Over there in Britain, though, it hasn't gone any further than a mention in the House of Lords a couple of years back --  with every British gov't since WWII, and every PM from Churchill on, involved in coverups and 'stonewalling',  it should be enough to roll a few pollies and bring the guvm'nt down...
And then there's the potential compensation bill ???      

The Telegraph wrote:Australia’s royal commission into child sex abuse has recommended that celibacy for Catholic priests should be optional and the sanctity of the confessional should be abandoned, as it ended an historic five-year inquiry that exposed horrific cases of abuse and cover-ups.

What exactly is their social theory? That Catholic priests are more likely than not to be abusers? Or, that wanking isn't good enough to relieve sexual tensions?

I'd like to have seen the results on the latter test. Are there weight categories, or what?

What is the reason they are not allowed to marry?
If they were allowed, would that not help stop them "kiddy fiddling"?

nicko wrote:What is the reason they are not allowed to marry?
If they were allowed, would that not help stop them "kiddy fiddling"?

Well, are they "kiddy fiddling" due to some testicular pressure or other? I'm curious as to what exactly the theory is.

nicko wrote:What is the reason they are not allowed to marry?
If they were allowed, would that not help stop them "kiddy fiddling"?

Historically, of course, even Roman Catholic Popes were married: Hormisdas, Adrian 11, John XV11 and Clement 1V to name but four.

My understanding is that RC priestly celibacy is, in fact, traditional and not actually dictated by Catholic dogma and the present pope, Francis, could permit the marriage of priests if he so wished.

In my opinion it would be a very good move.

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

nicko wrote:What is the reason they are not allowed to marry?
If they were allowed, would that not help stop them "kiddy fiddling"?

Historically, of course, even Roman Catholic Popes were married: Hormisdas, Adrian 11, John XV11 and Clement 1V to name but four.

My understanding is that RC priestly celibacy is, in fact, traditional and not actually dictated by Catholic dogma and the present pope, Francis, could permit the marriage of priests if he so wished.



In my opinion it would be a very good move.

Correct. The Church was a thousand years old before it definitively took a stand in favor of celibacy in the twelfth century at the Second Lateran Council held in 1139, when a rule was approved forbidding priests to marry. In 1563, the Council of Trent reaffirmed the tradition of celibacy.

It’s a bit hypocritical considering this...http://content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1931193,00.html

Francis is a good person. He’s trying to drag the church into the 21st century but is up against centuries of tradition as well as outdated dogma. Baby steps.

Original Quill wrote:

nicko wrote:
What is the reason they are not allowed to marry?
If they were allowed, would that not help stop them "kiddy fiddling"?

Well, are they "kiddy fiddling" due to some testicular pressure or other?  I'm curious as to what exactly the theory is.  

I don't see any reputable links being made anywhere between celibacy and people 'becoming' paedophiles...  I would consider such suggestions to be quite tenuous at best..

Priests in the Anglican and Uniting churches aren't celibate, nor in many other religions --  yet their rates of offenders aren't far behind the Catholic church.         What the Catholic and Anglican churches both have that has favoured paedo's hiding away in their ranks, is that long-standing tendency for many to either ignore or coverup so many wrongdoings --   putting the reputation and appearance of the church organisation before and above the safety and welfare of those victims of sexual abusers..

What is a much better argument for both removing the "compulsory celibacy" requirement for priests (and nuns, brothers, monks..), and allowing female priests as well, would be to allow a wider range of people to consider the priesthood;  while making it a criminal offence to ignore or hide offences, or to defend or harbour the abusers, could conceivably make such organisations as churches, orphanages, scout troops, PCYCs, various charities, that much less attractive for the paedo's to work in, to start with  ???          

nicko wrote:What is the reason they are not allowed to marry?
If they were allowed, would that not help stop them "kiddy fiddling"?

The problem isn't about if priests are having adult heterosexual relationships that are either legitimate/permitted or illegitimate/unpermitted by their Catholic rules...


How does the changing of these rules have anything to do with preventing homosexual/heterosexual peado priests from abusing children...!?


Surely any normal priest who transgressed from celibacy would just be doing so with a consenting adult heterosexual partner...!?


Why would a restriction of an adult heterosexual partner make anyone start abusing children... instead of just making them start having a secret adult heterosexual partner...!?

Tommy Monk wrote:

nicko wrote:What is the reason they are not allowed to marry?
If they were allowed, would that not help stop them "kiddy fiddling"?

The problem isn't about if priests are having adult heterosexual relationships that are either legitimate/permitted or illegitimate/unpermitted by their Catholic rules...


How does the changing of these rules have anything to do with preventing homosexual/heterosexual peado priests from abusing children...!?


Surely any normal priest who transgressed from celibacy would just be doing so with a consenting adult heterosexual partner...!?


Why would a restriction of an adult heterosexual partner make anyone start abusing children... instead of just making them start having a secret adult heterosexual partner...!?

It has nothing to do with homoseuxality

It has everything to do with priests taking advantage op children, no matter boy or girls

So on one point, priests being allowed to have sex, would not curb this problem, as the problem, is peado's joining the order.

The issue is that and how the Church continually covers up for them

My point was not about homosexuals... and neither was the op...

Tommy Monk wrote:My point was not about homosexuals... and neither was the op...

Why even then  mention it?

Twice

Didge wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:My point was not about homosexuals... and neither was the op...

Why even then  mention it?

Twice

I mentioned once... and only as a relevant part of the main point...

Tommy Monk wrote:

Didge wrote:


Why even then  mention it?

Twice

I mentioned once... and only as a relevant part of the main point...

Twice

Once, only as being a relevant part of the main point...

Tommy Monk wrote:Once, only as being a relevant part of the main point...

Still twice Tommy

Its not even a main point
The main point, is on how so many people could get away with child abuse and even worse. The Christian church covered this up.

The problem isn't about if priests are having adult heterosexual relationships that are either legitimate/permitted or illegitimate/unpermitted by their Catholic rules...


How does the changing of these rules have anything to do with preventing homosexual/heterosexual peado priests from abusing children...!?


Surely any normal priest who transgressed from celibacy would just be doing so with a consenting adult heterosexual partner...!?


Why would a restriction of an adult heterosexual partner make anyone start abusing children... instead of just making them start having a secret adult heterosexual partner...!?

Tommy Mon wrote:

Surely any normal priest who transgressed from celibacy would just be doing so with a consenting adult heterosexual partner...!?


Why would a restriction of an adult heterosexual partner make anyone start abusing children... instead of just making them start having a secret adult heterosexual partner...!?

 Come again?

Normal priest = one who isn't a peadophile