Clerical abuse!

[haveaharp]

Is anyone still chewing the altar rails after all this ? I wouldnt set foot in a church again

[theskull1]

http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0302/abuse.html

"Bishop Brennan said one-fifth of 'the road to justice' remained to be travelled and that to complete it, he would have to seek funding from parishes."

So throwing money at the problem is the way to "solve" this burning issue. Nothing about the churches collective conscience over this past 60 years. They have done their bit visiting the pope and all so now it's over to you lot 

[johnneycool]

quote from the article;

'Over €750,000 had been spent treating offenders, which Dr Brennan called a long-term investment in protecting children.'

He could save a few bob by allowing the Guards and PSNI investigate to see whether the offenders have a case to answer and they'll receive all the treatment they need behind bars.

[mylestheslasher]

Anyone who has anything to do with this shower of bastards can only at this point have lost their marbles. I can see no other logical reason that anyone would go to a catholic church anymore.

Read this, I think the last line sums up my opinion on this 100%. Let them go back to worshipping in a ditch if thats what it takes to see justice done.

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/shane-dunphy-ferns-plea-for-abuse-money-left-me-shaking-with-rage-2086294.html

Shane Dunphy: Ferns' plea for abuse money left me shaking with rage

AFTER almost two decades working in the field of child protection, it is rare that I find myself actually trembling with rage, but yesterday morning on my usual commute to work, I experienced just such a paroxysm of emotion.

The cause for this anger was a news item which informed me that Dr Denis Brennan, the Bishop of Ferns, was inviting parishioners (and any individual priests who felt so inclined) to donate money to assist the church in footing a bill, the tally for which comes to more than €10m, to meet the legal costs of defending civil cases brought against the diocese in relation to clerical sexual abuse. In other words the Roman Catholic Church in Ferns is asking the victims of its own bitter failings to pay the price for the crime -- it is a request which beggars belief.

I grew up in Ferns. When I was eight, my class in primary school was moved to the local church for the year, while new classrooms were fitted for us in the local CBS. This was the first time I would realise that all was not as it should be. Several boys in my class were picked as altar boys to serve at the 10 o'clock Mass by the local curate. At eight years old, I could simply not understand why one of the boys in particular would come back to class after each Mass in tears. I wrote it off as nerves, or maybe that he was simply not a very good altar server, and had been chided for his liturgical failings.

It was many years later, when the priest in question was prosecuted as part of the Ferns Inquiry, that I understood what I had been seeing.

Much has been written about the social implications of clerical abuse in Ireland. The reports into clerical abuse in Ferns and Dublin have shown a distressing level of complicity within the wider community. How could the police, the health service, schools and many private citizens, have sat back and allowed such atrocities to happen? The priest who abused my friends was well-known as having a fondness for his altar boys, yet no one ever confronted him about it. And in its arrogance and lack of self-awareness, the church interpreted this as tacit approval.

Yet these are different times. Survivors and their families have had years to consider what was done, and to feel the anger they are entitled to feel.

WHEN I heard about Bishop Brennan's request, the image that immediately sprang to my mind was of a small, skinny, 13-year-old boy who was a friend of mine in my first year in secondary school. I'll call him Mike, though that was not his name. One day towards the end of the year, our class was brought to a local convent for a day's retreat. That evening, we were sent back to the school -- St Peter's College -- for a Mass and a candlelight ceremony. I played the guitar, and had left my instrument in its case back in the classroom, in the old part of the school, while we were away. I was sent to fetch it for the Mass, and Mike came with me.

The corridors were all in darkness and, as we were in the class, we heard footsteps approaching. Mike froze, went pale and pulled me into a large storage cupboard. I remember vividly that he was shaking with fear, tears coursing down his pallid cheeks.

When the steps had passed, I pulled away and stumbled back out into the room. "What was that all about?" I asked him, trying not to sound annoyed, as he was visibly upset. "That's Father ____", he said. "You don't want to get caught here by him. Not in the dark." I asked Mike why not, but he just shook his head and said he could not even begin to tell me.

That priest was also prosecuted. As I write this, I still see Mike's face and feel him beside me shaking with terror. Mike was a boarder in St Peter's. How many nights did he lie awake, terrified of what might happen to him? How many letters did he write home, begging not to have to stay another awful day in a place where predators stalked the hallways?

Bishop Brennan and his comrades suggest that Mike's family might like to make a contribution to their war chest. I think it is sickening and shameful that they should even dream of such a thing. Some say that the church in Ferns may go bankrupt without help. I say let it. Perhaps going back to the days of the Mass Rocks might teach them some humility.

Shane Dunphy is a child protection expert.

- Shane Dunphy

Irish Independent

[Main Street]

Maybe this is a part of what Bishop of Ferns referred to when he described the recent talks in the Vatican as a "watershed moment" that would redefine the relationship between the Church and abuse victims.

[Hardy]

Some commentator suggested they should at least call it what it is - a rape tax.

[orangeman]

I've just read this story and have read the story told in different ways in other papers - this simply does not make any sense.


What planet are these boys living on ?.

[Ulick]

Bishop Brennan (well named) is a first rate ****. The in-laws have been trying to get him to deal with a matter for three or four years now and he just blankly refuses to see them or even acknowledge their correspondence. They've even made representations to the Vatican who have in turn instructed him to deal with the issue and he's still refusing to do anything.

[muppet]

[Pangurban]

ABUSE-SECRECY Mar-10-2010 (600 words) Backgrounder. xxxi

Vatican expects bishops to comply with civil laws on reporting abuse

By John Thavis
Catholic News Service

VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- Vatican officials are concerned that the church's longstanding insistence on confidentiality in its treatment of priestly sexual abuse cases is being misinterpreted as a ban on reporting serious accusations to civil authorities.

As past episodes and accusations of abuse have come to light recently in Germany, Austria and the Netherlands, media attention has focused in part on what kind of guidance or instructions local bishops received from the Vatican on how to handle such cases.

An increasingly widespread impression -- and a mistaken one, Vatican officials say -- is that Pope Benedict XVI himself, when he headed the Vatican's doctrinal congregation, ordered bishops not to inform civil authorities about accusations of sexual abuse by priests.

The issue surfaced March 8 when Germany's justice minister, Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger, said that as Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, the pope had in 2001 written a directive that said serious sex abuse cases "are not supposed to be divulged outside the church."

The minister's reference was to the 2001 document, "De delictis gravioribus" ("On more serious crimes"), which gave the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith juridical control over how the church handles cases of sexual abuse of minors by priests. It was seen inside the Vatican as an important tool in making sure perpetrators were discovered and brought to justice.

But much media attention has focused on the fact that the 2001 document said such cases were covered by "pontifical secret," which meant they would be handled in strict confidentiality. Critics saw that as a way for the church to hide accusations from civil authorities.

Vatican officials said it was important for people to know that the confidentiality imposed on the church's internal handling of abuse cases does not exempt bishops or others from reporting serious facts and accusations to civil authorities. They emphasized that the Vatican document dealt with how church law treats such cases, not as a substitute for civil law, which deals with the crime separately.

"The purpose of 'pontifical secret' here was to respect the rights of the accused and of the witnesses, including the victim, to confidentiality," said one informed Vatican official. He said civil law often has similar provisions to protect confidentiality when a potential crime is under investigation.

"But this is an ecclesiastical law. It does not affect the duty to obey civil law," he added.

The official said the Vatican has never given bishops directives against cooperation with competent civil authorities. On the contrary, he said, the Vatican expects local bishops to comply with laws that mandate reporting of sex abuse allegations.

For example, the U.S. bishops' norms on sexual abuse, which were revised and approved by the Vatican in 2002, stated clearly: "The diocese/eparchy will comply with all applicable civil laws with respect to the reporting of allegations of sexual abuse of minors to civil authorities and will cooperate in their investigation." In many cases, civil law mandates that church authorities report such allegations.

But even as the Vatican has made it clear that bishops are not above the law, it has not encouraged local bishops to act as volunteer reporting agents for the state every time an accusation of sexual abuse is made.

Cardinal Claudio Hummes, head of the Congregation for Clergy, said in a recent interview that instances of sexual abuse by priests were "criminal facts" as well as serious sins, and require cooperation with the civil justice system.

"Once the evil deed has been objectively proven, one must resolutely pursue (the case) to the very end by also turning to ordinary justice," he said.

END

[mylestheslasher]

ABUSE-SECRECY Mar-10-2010 (600 words) Backgrounder. xxxi

Vatican expects bishops to comply with civil laws on reporting abuse

By John Thavis
Catholic News Service

VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- Vatican officials are concerned that the church's longstanding insistence on confidentiality in its treatment of priestly sexual abuse cases is being misinterpreted as a ban on reporting serious accusations to civil authorities.

As past episodes and accusations of abuse have come to light recently in Germany, Austria and the Netherlands, media attention has focused in part on what kind of guidance or instructions local bishops received from the Vatican on how to handle such cases.

An increasingly widespread impression -- and a mistaken one, Vatican officials say -- is that Pope Benedict XVI himself, when he headed the Vatican's doctrinal congregation, ordered bishops not to inform civil authorities about accusations of sexual abuse by priests.

The issue surfaced March 8 when Germany's justice minister, Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger, said that as Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, the pope had in 2001 written a directive that said serious sex abuse cases "are not supposed to be divulged outside the church."

The minister's reference was to the 2001 document, "De delictis gravioribus" ("On more serious crimes"), which gave the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith juridical control over how the church handles cases of sexual abuse of minors by priests. It was seen inside the Vatican as an important tool in making sure perpetrators were discovered and brought to justice.

But much media attention has focused on the fact that the 2001 document said such cases were covered by "pontifical secret," which meant they would be handled in strict confidentiality. Critics saw that as a way for the church to hide accusations from civil authorities.

Vatican officials said it was important for people to know that the confidentiality imposed on the church's internal handling of abuse cases does not exempt bishops or others from reporting serious facts and accusations to civil authorities. They emphasized that the Vatican document dealt with how church law treats such cases, not as a substitute for civil law, which deals with the crime separately.

"The purpose of 'pontifical secret' here was to respect the rights of the accused and of the witnesses, including the victim, to confidentiality," said one informed Vatican official. He said civil law often has similar provisions to protect confidentiality when a potential crime is under investigation.

"But this is an ecclesiastical law. It does not affect the duty to obey civil law," he added.

The official said the Vatican has never given bishops directives against cooperation with competent civil authorities. On the contrary, he said, the Vatican expects local bishops to comply with laws that mandate reporting of sex abuse allegations.

For example, the U.S. bishops' norms on sexual abuse, which were revised and approved by the Vatican in 2002, stated clearly: "The diocese/eparchy will comply with all applicable civil laws with respect to the reporting of allegations of sexual abuse of minors to civil authorities and will cooperate in their investigation." In many cases, civil law mandates that church authorities report such allegations.

But even as the Vatican has made it clear that bishops are not above the law, it has not encouraged local bishops to act as volunteer reporting agents for the state every time an accusation of sexual abuse is made.

Cardinal Claudio Hummes, head of the Congregation for Clergy, said in a recent interview that instances of sexual abuse by priests were "criminal facts" as well as serious sins, and require cooperation with the civil justice system.

"Once the evil deed has been objectively proven, one must resolutely pursue (the case) to the very end by also turning to ordinary justice," he said.

END

What a load of auld shite. I particularily like the last line which to me basically reads that once guilt has been determined by I presume church law then we can also turn to ordinary law.

So what happens to a bishop that refuses to follow these rules. Sure the pope has not even got around to accepting the resignation of the 3 irish bishops yet nor has he forced the 4th one to resign.

And what of the papal nuncio refusing to attend a commission in the sovereign country he is an ambassador to? The catholic church loves to release bullshit words and statements so the devouted will lap it up like kittens while the reality of what happens on the ground is totally different.

[GetOffThePitch]

I too whilst condemning the whole sorry mess feel for the good priests who carry on with their daily, sacrificing work. The church is flavour of the month for putting the boot into(yes perhaps justifiably). Its just a pity there are real, genuine people of faith getting tarnished. Yes a lot of the blame must go to the church but that doesn't help those of faith

[Main Street]

Here is the piece,
'Cardinal Claudio Hummes, head of the Congregation for Clergy, said in a recent interview that instances of sexual abuse by priests were "criminal facts" as well as serious sins, and require cooperation with the civil justice system.'

Fair enough. 

"Once the evil deed has been objectively proven, one must resolutely pursue (the case) to the very end by also turning to ordinary justice," he said.'
Objectively proven??
What are the criteria for an accustion to be objectively proven?  Where is all this done and by who?
There is nothing in the Charter about objective proof.
Here this emminent Cardinal is in direct confrontation with the Catholic Churchs' very own  'Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People'
from 2001 http://www.usccb.org/ocyp/charter.pdf
where there is no such "objective proof" required

ARTICLE 4. Dioceses/eparchies are to report an allegation of sexual
abuse of a person who is a minor to the public authorities. Dioceses/
eparchies are to comply with all applicable civil laws with respect to
the reporting of allegations of sexual abuse of minors to civil authorities
and cooperate in their investigation in accord with the law of the
jurisdiction in question.
Dioceses/eparchies are to cooperate with public authorities about
reporting cases even when the person is no longer a minor.
In every instance, dioceses/eparchies are to advise victims of their
right to make a report to public authorities and support this right.

Perhaps the Cardinal has got his articles mixed up
because in Article 5 the internal tribunal investigation is only to do with the accused and the Church and completely separate from the legal obligations outlined in article 4.

'Diocesan/eparchial policy is to provide that for even a single act of
sexual abuse of a minor*—whenever it occurred—which is admitted
12 | charter for the protection of children and young people
or established after an appropriate process in accord with canon law,
the offending priest or deacon is to be permanently removed from
ministry and, if warranted, dismissed from the clerical state. In keeping
with the stated purpose of this Charter, an offending priest or deacon'

[johnneycool]

I too whilst condemning the whole sorry mess feel for the good priests who carry on with their daily, sacrificing work. The church is flavour of the month for putting the boot into(yes perhaps justifiably). Its just a pity there are real, genuine people of faith getting tarnished. Yes a lot of the blame must go to the church but that doesn't help those of faith

By our own religious decree we sin by what we do and also what we fail to do, so if anyone in the church knew of any wrongdoings then they have sinned in the eyes of god even if they didn't break any laws. So this speads the net of wrongdoing far wider than those paedophiles doing the actual abusing.
The good people in the church should be shouting a lot louder about this than they seem to be as they will be tarnished by association for right or wrong.

[theskull1]

amen