Cloyne Report Released
Today’s Irish Catholic reports on the newly-released Cloyne report. (HT: NCR.)
The report concludes that “the Church’s own guidelines were “not fully or consistently implemented” in the diocese as recently as 2008.” The focus of the news item is Bishop John Magee, who was found in December of 2008 “by the National Board for Safeguarding Children in the Catholic Church (NBSCCC) to be operating child safeguarding policies that were ‘inadequate and in some respects dangerous’”. He also was known at the time to have embraced and kissed a candidate for priesthood, telling the young man that he loved him.
Wasn’t enough, though–the Irish hierarchy debated whether this meant that Magee should resign. He finally did resign in 2010.
Continuing in this “plus ca change” mode is the report’s conclusion:
In May this year the head of the NBSCCC, Ian Elliott, admitted that he had considered resigning over what he described as a lack of co-operation from senior Church leaders in Ireland to his auditing of dioceses handling of allegations. Bishops had withdrawn from the auditing process citing data protection concerns. However, after assurances were received all dioceses are now co-operating according to the NBSCCC and the body expects to complete the audits in the coming year.
Is there a Philadelphia in Ireland? We’ll see.
Other questions arise for me.
1. First, the bishop’s failure to address sex abuse cases (the report reads: “It is a remarkable fact that Bishop Magee took little or no active interest in the management of clerical child sexual abuse cases until 2008”,) is a different KIND of failure than his inappropriate sexual/romantic overtures to a young man who I infer to be of legal age. Will the two be differentiated in the media hubbub?
2. I find the second–the sexual/romantic stuff–to be an egregious abuse of power over an aspirant to the priesthood. But it is also a sad and tragic reflection of Magee’s inner life. Would you describe such a man (to the extent that we can infer the man from his actions) as having a vocation to celibate life, or is he a man with unrequited sexual/romantic longings who is hiding in the clerical closet? A priest I know reaches out sexually (to adult women,) but will never face within himself the deeper question of vocation, responsibility, and the relationship of sexual acts and overtures to a deep unmet need for intimacy. I can’t help but see Magee in the same light. Part of the cost of mandatory celibacy for the Church is the acting out of men who cannot face their normal human desire for intimacy in a mature way. And if Magee is gay, (he may be straight or bisexual in orientation, and just be looking for sex where he thinks he can get it,) this “intimacy closet” is made darker still by the Church’s harsh anti-gay teaching.
3. Given that Magee was known to have been at least sloppy in handling matters related to sexual abuse until 2008, long after the US Church began its implosion, why was there debate as to whether he should resign? What would it have taken for the other Irish bishops to say “this guy is dangerous to the Church, and should leave”? Archbishop Diarmuid Martin was one of the strong voices in favor of Magee’s resignation, but his voice went unheeded. And how many young men does a bishop get to make passes at before someone–anyone–finds that behavior problematic for a leader of the Church??
The full 400 page report is at http://www.justice.ie/en/JELR/Pages/Cloyne_Rpt. I just don’t have the heart to read it.
More sorrows upon the land!
It seems that the Irish government investigations are about the closest that Catholics will ever come to a independent Peace & Justice Commission, similar to the South African model after apartheid headed by Nobel laureate Archbishop Desmond Tuto.
Given what we already know, nearly every Catholic bishop today, certainly every one who is complicit in the sexual exploitation of children and vulnerable adults, should resign allowing Catholics to start all over again with a different kind of priesthood, a different kind of governance structure.
An inexorable evolution toward a new Christian way of life has been underway for a long time. The evidence has been all around us for a long time (chief among them, the millions of Catholics who have voted with their feet and walked their hearts away).
It may take us years, decades, even centuries. But, we will get there. Our job is to help our children and grandchildren in any way we can.
Jim Jenkins is right about how long it will take. If your annoyed about Bishop Magee’s protection by other hierarchs , a Magee from small diocese, what can one say about the real high level protection garnered by Cardinal Groer of Vienna. Some reports are that he abused 2000 young men.. Remember when we all got fed up and stopped having police investigate police? We got civilian review boards. Well the bishops got lay review boards hand picked by themselves, boards who then said enough of this cover-up. I posit they have lately sent out a message to dioceses asking for sycophant candidates. .
And then we still have the arrogance of the likes of Bruskewitz, Vasa and all of the US Eparchies who basically have told their brother bishops: up yours!
Until and unless these guys come under some local control as opposed to being direct reports to the pope (about 3,000+ — http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church#Dioceses.2C_parishes_and_religious_orders) -span of control problems, maybe? – there will continue to be a lack of accountability within the ranks of those who choose to say “up yours.”
I’m not sure I buy the therapeutic premise that if Bishop Magee made a pass at a seminarian, this indicates that he had a “deep unmet need for intimacy,” and that this unmet need and the unrequited longings it begot suggest that the bishop didn’t really have a vocation, but was only using the priesthood as a refuge. Good priests who do not make passes at seminarians (or anyone else) may have unrequited longings, and those with unrequited longings may not lack for intimacy in their lives. No amount of emotional intimacy overrides or compensates for sexual appetites. (Likewise, evidence of an unmet emotional need isn’t a sure sign that a person isn’t getting enough sex.) If Lisa’s point is that no one can be truly happy and celibate, I think she’s mistaken (my speculation versus hers; let some happy celibate rule on the matter). But if her point is that anyone who had a real vocation to celibacy would have such a rich emotional life without sex that he or she would never feel — let alone yield to — temptation, I suspect that most of those who have taken and kept vows of celibacy would disagree with her.
To everyone who cares about children, please read the “Cloyne Report”. It is one more example of how the catholic church hierarchy systematically protected themselves instead of protecting innocent kids. link to report… http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0713/cloyne_report.pdf
Crimes have been committed and the only way to get this abuse stopped is for outside law enforcement to take action against those responsible.
ALL who sexually abuse a child, plus ALL who cover up this abuse, need to be held accountable and charged for these crimes.
For the sake of victims and for the sake of children, it is imperative for everyone (who has been harmed by bishops, priests, nuns, brothers, employees, etc.) to report your abuse to law enforcement and prosecutors. Do not report your abuse to church officials.
It is easier to stay silent and let others carry the burden of exposing the truth, but keep in mind your silence only hurts, and by speaking up there is a chance for healing, exposing the truth, and therefore protecting others.
Judy Jones, SNAP Midwest Associate Director, USA, 636-433-2511
snapjudy@gmail.com
“Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests”
http://www.snapnetwork.org/
Background to the Cloyne Report:
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2011/0713/breaking11.html
Here is a good source of information on Irish reactions from a variety of sources:
http://clericalwhispers.blogspot.com/search?updated-max=2011-07-13T15%3A56%3A00%2B01%3A00&max-results=20
Note Sean Brady’s response:
“I apologise and express my shame and sorrow at what has happened. …
The findings of this Report confirm that grave errors of judgement were made and serious failures of leadership occurred. This is deplorable and totally unacceptable.”
PASSIVE VOICE – what else from Brady, or any bishop? Errors were made, leadership failures occurred. It all just happened out of the ethers somehow, without anyone intending any harm. We’re so sorry, yes, we are, and are responding fully with outreach.
That Sean Brady has not been removed by Benedict for his own scandalous corruption speaks louder than any apologias masquerading as apologies. I don’t have the stomach to read the report either. Brady, Magee and his monsignor belong in prison together.
At this point we know what we will find in the report.
There is no point in imagining what Brady could or should have said.
As long as Pope Benedict stays silent on his own past role as a bishop in Munich,
he is setting an example of evasiveness and lack of taking personal responsibility.
I now hold him responsible for the continuation of this unaccountability scandal.
Here’s to hoping that civil society will continue to expose the truth of what happened.
Congratulations to Irish justice.
I’m left confused in all this about who belongs to what organization and what organizations have the responsibility to whom for what. Government seems mixed up in matters far more than would likely be the case in the US. It would be useful to read a big-picture explanation of this ongoing drama.
Do I understand correctly that Bishop Magee kissed a 17 and a half yo seminarian on the forehead with a comforting intention, something the seminarian only retrospectively thought of as suspicious, a boundary violation? This went to the police, the other bishops, Rome, and led to the bishop’s resignation.
No doubt Bp Magee’s Italian years gave him a different idea of where touching would be inappropriate. Indeed his gesture is the sort of thing Jesus would do — consider the young disciple who lay in his bosom.
Now our government is trying to bring in mandatory reporting of all allegations — even overriding medical oaths of confidentiality and the seal of the confessional. This will ensure many ruined lives.
What is the evidence that the bishops made a pass at the seminarian?
I realize that many gestures can be interpret as “a pass” which are not necessarily so at all. Bp Magee’s gesture may have simply been what Augustine praises as an indicium benevolentiae.
A pass I take to mean a sollicitation of sexual intimacy.
Correction, the bishop, not bishops
Magee is widely perceived to be gay. His inappropriate behavior is perfectly explicable as that of a sentimental gay man in presence of a lovely youth, toward whom in all probability his romantic aspirations were purely platonic. The youth at the time felt them to be paternal. To suggest that Magee could be heterosexual but “looking for sex where he thinks he can get it” is a low, uncharitable imputation, typical of the demonizing suppositiousness rife in this area. I can well understand my old teacher Msgr O’Callaghan refusing to throw priests to the wolves. Allegations should be serious and proven before they are allowed to wreck people’s lives.
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/republic-of-ireland/priests-told-to-reveal-information-16022830.html
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/republic-of-ireland/gardai-investigated-claim-bishop-kissed-teenage-altar-boy-16023147.html
I have to say that if John Magee’s life is wrecked, he is the agent of the destruction It is completely unacceptable for a leader of any kind to engage in somewhat intimate behavior with a youngster— the “lovely youth” defense is as disquieting as the behavior it seeks to defend. And with regard to the protection of children and youth in the face of clerical sexual abuse, Bishop Magee apparently didn’t even bother to call it in. He just didn’t engage. There’s a whole lot of wreckage created by that inexplicable neglect.
The Cloyne report is deplorable(the nicest word I can think of) in terms of the issue of the church’s dealing with sex abuse there!
THAT IS THE POINT!
Forget about celibacy, Matthew, or how “appropriate” Bishop McGee’s actions toward the seminarian were -this former secretary to Popes and leader of the Papal household was clueless in dealing with the issue.
And is now reported post resignation to be”in hiding” in the US.
What a disgrace.
When I studied counselling. I was taught if I said I was “distressed” by someone’s hurt, that was was a “nonhuman” term to mean I see you’re suffering, but it’s really not my problem.
The Papl nuncio, being called on to meet with the Prime Minisster noted he was “distressed” by the report.
I posit these guys still don’t get it.
As Irish reports note from authorities, the issue will be seen as how Church law, not the law of society, allowed this to happen.!
A problem that will continue.
Of course, when the Vatican holds its meeting on sex abuse at the Gregorian early next year, Archbishop Martin is not invited.
And it’s unlikely there will be victims voices there either.So it’s not surprising that harsh light falls on the Vatican (despite all the loyalist fudgings.)
BTW. MSW reports at NCR there’ll be a press conference tomorrow to announce Rigali is gone in Philly and maybe name a sucessor.Then we can have a thread here with a link to Rocco maybe about how things will change there.
But for my money things won’t change until the governance structure and the clericalism that deeply infects is is lanced!
If a professor engages in such behavior with a student, I believe that he gets a stern warning from the university administration. The existing relationship of authority makes it completely inappropriate to have any kind of romantic engagement, although that does happen, not infrequently.
The problem, as always with bishops, is with checks and balances: who will give a stern warning to the bishop? Who serves the role of the board of trustees or of regents? Remote oversight from the Vatican is a failure and no alternative exists within the organization. The structure is defective.
Given all the scandals in the Church, it seems to me that a bishop kissing the forehead of a young man—who “thinks” he may have been under 18 at the time—is really not worth an article in a newspaper. Whatever Bishop McGee’s sins may have been, this surely was not one of them. If it was anything at all, it was a minor impropriety, but it’s hard to say it rose even to that level.
David N. –
ISTM that the Magee incident is important because it shows that either Bishop Magee is so incredibly naive he doesn’t know an ambiguous gesture when he sees one, or if he genuinely loved the kid, he would not have made at best an ambiguous gestures towards him. Either way he shouldn’t be in a position of such authority.
It seems to me the Magee case shows it’s time to concentrate on the problem of incompetent and/or misbehaving bishops, whether gay or non-gay. The buck stops with them, as the laity has been crying for 30 years.
What do you think of the legislation proposed by the Irish Minister of Justice which would force doctors to override their oath of confidentiality and priests to reveal information obtained under the seal of the confessional? I think it is unwise to scrap something that doctors, psychiatrists and priests have found to be absolutely essential to their ministries for centuries.
I believe in America physicians have long been required to report certain kinds of information to the authorities. (As usual, Barbara will know the details.)
Demanding that the seal of the confessional be violated is appalling, and the fact that it would be proposed in Ireland is very surprising. Has even Vietnam ever passed a law like that? Or even England under Elizabeth 1?
It’s pointless besides. Confession can always be done anonymously.
Here is more on the new legislation: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2011/0714/breaking1.html
A prominent priests speaks out in defense of the confessional seal: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2011/0714/breaking54.html
It is unthinkable. The Vatican would expel the Irish ambassador.
Imagine if the legislation was made retrospective and priests were commanded to yield any info they had picked up in their entire career of hearing confessions. Priests as STASI snitches…
The very idea is an outrage. But cooler heads will certainly prevail.
And if not, you will simply have to use your imagination. When the Emperor Diocletian decreed that bishops must hand over their altar missals to be publicly burned or suffer martyrdom, some bishops handed over the missals, some suffered martyrdom, and some figured out that the average Roman soldier was illiterate and handed over (with a great show of reluctance) the diocesan maintenance records.
Demanding that the seal of the confessional be violated is appalling, and the fact that it would be proposed in Ireland is very surprising. Has even Vietnam ever passed a law like that?
Felapton,
A number of state laws in the United States requiring mandatory reporting of child abuse do not exempt clergy (including what they may hear in the confessional).
Has it ever been tested in court?
I’m with Bob Nunz. All this tsktsking about celebacy, etc is wishing away the human propensity to sin. Priests are human and like all of us are apt to fail. But why do we not talk about the horrendous sin of the church in hiding sinfulness in order to protect the monarchical governance system of the church. “All priests are saints, bishops are really saints, and all popes are perfect (cf. John Paul ii)”
The Irish government should sever diplomatic relations with the Holy See, and expel its nuncio, Archbishop Giuseppe Leanza.
Despite not being the longest serving ambassador in Dublin, Leanza holds the title of dean of the diplomatic corps, an honor granted from the beginning of the Irish state to nuncios to mark its reverence for the church.
Diplomatic immunity is a great convenience for secreting “dangerous” documents about sexual abuse to keep them out of reach of Irish law. Same for the US, where a bishop here warned dioceses to send anything dangerous to the nunciature in DC, meaning prosecutors and survivor attorneys would be denied access.
Diplomatic status is a wonderful mechanism for keeping the Vatican above any fray, despite the Cloyne Report’s citing of the Vatican’s role.
As for the confessional seal, that is a third rail to be avoided. It’s a distraction, and any priest would go to jail instead of violate it, becoming a hero in the process.
NH is listed in David Nichol’s link as denying privilege. In fact, while clergy are mentioned as mandated reporters, some legislators tried a few years ago to clarify the matter by including specific language denying the seal, and it failed.
As is, the statute is left purposely vague in its application. I’ve read a deposition of a priest in an abuse case here where he successfully invoked the seal and that was that.
I’ve heard of cases where priests invoke the seal outside of confession to keep a victim quiet, and the victim does not know that violates church law. It’s a nasty loophole sometimes, but better to work around it than get detoured into that political and moral quagmire.
n Ireland, the Roman Catholic Church has established itself as a criminal organization through the actions of its leaders and agents. It has kept international tentacles reaching to the US and Europe to shield abusers at risk of criminal justice. If you want to know the real values an organization stands for, look to the leaders, especially when the leadership is self-reproducing. Their decisions and actions tell you what values are actually important in the organization. The documented history is brutally clear. Followers, as often, suffer.
Ireland’s Justice Minister Shatter “said the law will apply to everyone and that the internal rules of any organisation – faith or otherwise – did not matter.” Given the demonstrated criminal nature of the organization as well as its own internal limited regard for a number of vaunted Church internal rules (e.g., celibacy, confession, contraception, child sexual abuse), the days of claiming special favors for what you declare to be an essential religious feature are over in Ireland. My ancestors weep.
Felapton (7/14 2:16pm):
Does this maybe suggest that the Irish church and the Vatican may have had good reason to resist the recent initiatives of the state?
“The actions of men are the best interpreters of their thoughts.”
John Locke, in An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1689), Book I, Chapter II, paragraph 3
So, skip the self-excusing statements of intentions and promises coming out of chanceries and the Vatican.
@David Smith
This is the first time I have seen any mention of denial of the seal by anyone in government in Ireland. It was not part of the 1996 Framework proposal, or any other effort, if memory serves. This shows the current widened extent of revulsion by the people for church practices.
The nuncio’s 1997 letter about canon law mentions nothing about the seal being a concern. I have a pdf but no way of posting it.
@ Matthew,
No, I’m NOT saying that “no one can be truly happy and celibate,” nor am I ignoring the requited and unrequited longings of any human soul, married, celibate, or whatever. (Though I do think a true vocation to lifelong celibacy is rarer than we Catholics often like to think. Luther was right on that one.)
But what this fellow did–over-long embraces, kisses, murmurings of “I love you” is simply not the general behavior of a man who has come to a mature peace with celibate life. And this sounds to me more like an intimacy issue than a strictly sexual issue, for which more direct gropings are often a first move, as we’ve seen in too many cases of sexual misbehavior, clerical and otherwise. People living celibacy with psychosexual integrity, i.e., a degree of peace, even though–as for non-celibates–temptations do come, generally don’t latch on to vulnerable people in this way. And regardless, he was behaving unacceptably for a bishop with a man trying to enter the priesthood.
He may simply be a predator. grooming a potential mark. But he sounds sadly lonely to me. And I agree with several above that the central issue here is not Magee’s at least unprofessional, unethical and deeply creepy behavior than with his indifference to clerical sexual abuse on his watch. Hence my first question–will the two be differentiated in the media?
Fears about laws regarding the seal of the confessional are a red herring. Priests are bound before God not to violate the seal. They shouldn’t. Simple as that.
I continue to fail to see how the continued ugliness in Ireland gets sidetracked in discussions about celibacy, episcopal ‘impropriety” or the breaking of the confessional seal!
Where is our sense of perspective? Or are we stil mired in a defend the perogatives of Rome and the hierachy ast the cost of injustice??????????
@David Smith: I know nothing about the situation in Ireland, but the Church is wise to be cautious here in America. It is true that Catholic priests have committed some abominable crimes. But not everybody who professes to care about the victims really does. There are many people who would like to instrumentalize the scandal to diminish or even destroy the Church’s credibility. Chief among these are people who believe that right and wrong are some sort of malicious Catholic conspiracy to prevent them from doing what they want to, like people about to jump off the edge of a cliff who think if nobody tells them about the law of gravity they won’t fall.
Carolyn (07/14 6:17 pm)
Or it shows something much deeper, Carolyn. Converts can be the most zealous believers, and people who have the most invested in a social system can become deeply embittered when they feel the system has betrayed them. Could be the Irish government is determined to attack what they see as an institution that has betrayed the country. In that case, the Church will be only prudent if it mistrusts them.
Felapton (7/14 6:31 pm), indeed. Of course the usual means in the US for attacking people is the courts – money and prison. Money’s been done and will continue to be done so long as there’s cash to take. I imagine there are a lot of people who would be delighted to see a bishop in jail.
Yes, I would be delighted to see bishops convicted of criminal endangerment, failure to report under the law, perjury, and obstruction of justice, and sentenced to jail for years. So many deserve it, but escaped indictment because they kept the secrets for so long, so well.
A common episcopal response is colossal failures of memory when questioned under oath. One newly-installed bishop who often testifies in court entertained about 40 Jesuits at a conference, when he told them how he would recite to himself walking into court, “I’m sorry, Your Honor, but I do not remember.” The Jesuits at the dinner laughed loudly.
Plea deals in OH and NH avoided prosecution, but now Phila offers the prospect of a secretary for clergy finally in bright orange.
Having listened to a criminal justice professor last weekend at the SNAP conference who researched litigation by survivors, and found the popular meme about survivors being out only for the money a gross mis-characterization, I challenge the hurtful charge.
Amongst the civil litigation I’m personally aware of: one survivor accepted a paltry sum for groping because he could not admit to his lawyer, his therapist or his wife, that he had been raped, so searing was the shame. Another almost handed over the check to the religious order because it felt like blood money, despite great need for the modest support it offered.
Civil litigation is the only way to name a perpetrator publicly, and the greatest desire of survivors, the research shows, is to make sure others are not abused as they were. So often the perpetrator was still in ministry somewhere, still a threat. Or if the priest is deceased, how many others are suffering in silence?
Other times, survivors of the same priest found affirmation they were not the only ones as they had been told. Or, parents learned their child’s dysfunction was not their fault. The drugs, suicide attempts, etc. came out of the abuse experience, and it answers so many questions for family members.
I believe it is almost impossible to disabuse people of contrary opinions, but I cannot be silent when grievous judgments are assumed against those I admire for their unbelievable courage in coming forward. Whatever settlement is negotiated, it is justice too long delayed and too long denied.
Bishop betrays his people by covering up sexual abuse of children.
Report exposes it.
Media react with outrage.
And you are worried that the church is being attacked?
Right now that is the least of my worries. The dysfunction of my church has higher priority by far.
@David Smith – “Could be the Irish government is determined to attack what they see as an institution that has betrayed the country. ”
The Roman Catholic Church _is_ an institution that has betrayed the people of Ireland, of all places. This week’s report is the fourth independent scathing one, with most of the dioceses yet to be reviewed. The government has been taking extraordinary measures to straighten out its part. As a measure of the Church’s activity, today, the presence of the nuncio was demanded, and he was ordered to bring the report to the Vatican and return with an explanation. His expulsion is being called for. See irish Times – about 20 articles http://www.irishtimes.com/topics/cloynereport/
At present, 18 religious orders are on the hook to compensate victims because of their documented historical abuse of children, including burying dead ones in unmarked mass graves.
@Felapton is looking for people who would like to destroy the Church’s credibility. No need to look. The Churchmen are doing it amazingly well all by themselves. See Magee’s multiple public flat-out lies reported this week. http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2011/0713/breaking34.html
In my experience instructing 17-18 year olds from a low level of authority, if I had hugged one, kissed him/her on the forehead, and told him/her I dreamed of him/her, I would have expected to be summarily thrown out of the job with prejudice before sundown. That was in an institution deeply dedicated to free thinking. Lust, hunger, romance, unrequited longings may be interesting but are irrelevant, celibate or not. Body play with underlings in the office is totally unacceptable, as Claire pointed out (7/14, 11:12AM).
Uh oh:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/14/irish-summon-vatican-dipl_n_898215.html
Really bad uh oh:
http://www.herald.ie/national-news/vatican-shelters-magee-as-abuse-report-fury-grows-2821721.html
I see the story of the bishop and the 18yo seems to attract more attention than any other of the allegations. Although the Irish police found nothing criminal in it, it will strike terror into the hearts of Irish priests. It means that any Italianate geture of affection they may have made toward anyone in the course of their priestly careers can be cited against them and ruin their lives. http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/0715/1224300763507.html?via=rel
Joseph O’L. -
Any priest that can’t tell whether he is in Ireland or Italy should find another job. When in Rome …
We could do with a lot more of Italian warmth and expressiveness in our chilly island.
Has anyone here read the Cloyne Report? I have rarely come across such an unreadable text. It is composed by bureaucrats who seem intoxicated with their own importance and very hypersensitive to any perceived infringement of their rules. The cases of alleged wrong doing are various described as historical (more than 30 years in the past) or obscure and elusive.That is why the bishop’s alleged kiss has been made so much of in the media. Since people will ritually denounce all priests mentioned as child rapists, I searched “rape” and found 2 references to one case, and many more reference to “theRapeutic”. Msgr Callaghan is the most named person — I remember him as my teacher in Maynooth and on other occasions up to 1981 — a good and humane man, who if he erred here, erred through hearing a plea like C S Parnell’s: ‘Do not throw me to the wolves.’
As to the bishop’s kiss, I recall words of Newman (from Murray, Newman the Oratorian, quoted from memory): “My dear Fathers, I did not think I should ever have to address you on such a matter as I must now bring to your attention. I would ask you to be aware that certain gestures of affection that are perfectly natural will not be seen so by the world. I must therefore insist that you must not any longer take any of the boys to your rooms.”
I suppose Newman’s constant “my dear” and “my dearest” s would be regarded as boundary violations today. Of course in Victorian England his Italianate side was sneered at as effeminate and worse.
Please, let’s keep our eye on the ball!
This is not about the nature of a “bishop’s kiss” or what is the statute of limitations on boundary violations.
This is about the systematic sexual abuse and exploitation of children by priest and bishops, and the obstruction of justice, denial and silence of complicit hierarchs – NOT ONLY in Ireland, but AROUND THE GLOBE, in almost every culture where the Catholic Church has an established presence.
The Irish government should be applauded for their determination to hold hierarchs and Vatican to account. It is as close as Catholics will ever come to what is really needed: a UN sponsored Peace, Justice & Reconciliation commission or tribunal similar to the one led by Archbishop Desmond Tutu which investigated human rights crimes in South Africa during the apartheid regime.
Let’s hope that the Irish government will expand their inquiry and investigation into the vast Vatican financial holdings which allows hierarchs to continue to act in their arrogant narcissism with impunity, and which allows the hierarchs maintain their political hegemony over millions of Catholics world-wide.
The rape and sodomy of children by priests and bishops and the complicity of hierarchs is the greatest scandal to befall the church since the crusades and Inquisition. If Catholics don’t soon get a clue, and treat this situation with the seriousness it deserves, within a decade there wont be much left around to even call a Catholic Church.
Let’s not forget the Irish government is carry our water for us because here in the US we have yet to find the courage to fully confront the rape and sodomy of our children by priests and bishops. Where are our investigations by our political institutions?
Father O’Leary, as specified at the beginning of the report, the goal is not to study the cases of sexual abuse themselves, but the protocol to prevent those cases. The report shows that the protocol is totally ineffective, because of its defective implementation. Infringement of rules is the point. We do not need another report to show that sexual abuse occured (that’s been established). This report shows that the guidelines are window-dressing.
Whether the norms of society regarding intimacy are good or bad, they are what they are and, in the society in which people live here and now, Bp Magee’s gestures were clearly inappropriate.
Msgr O’Callaghan said: “I tended to show favour to accused priests vis-à-vis complaints in some cases” and “in some instances I became emotionally drawn to the plight of accused priests”. He also explained that he preferred a pastoral approach and felt that what he regarded as the “rule-led” procedures of the Framework Document interfered with this approach. That is very dangerous. Guidelines are there precisely to prevent injustices that risk happening when people naturally have more empathy for the people who are closer to them (their brother priests, in this case) than those who are more distant (unknown people complaining about long past sexual abuse). His emotions led him down the wrong path and he ignored the protocol that was precisely there to prevent that.
I notice that your reactions show a lot of sympathy for the poor priests terrorized by the atmosphere and threatened by possibly excessive future laws. We’ll cross that bridge when we get there. I am afraid that you may be showing the same one-sided sympathy that Msgr O’Callaghan and other clergy have shown. Such people should not be have administrative responsibilities.
Right now is the time to hear the victims.
Maybe Ireland will break relations with the Holy See. I certainly hope so. That would be a much-needed move to prevent the misuse of diplomatic immunity to hide evidence of crimes. Perhaps then subpoenas could be issued for documents the Murphy Commission was denied, as it investigated sexual abuse by priests.
The US needs to do the same, but the chances are probably nil. Then again, maybe not. Survivor voices have been strangled too long by the machinations of Vatican personnel determined to keep the secrets.
Maybe more DA’s and government investigations here can emulate what has been done in Ireland. It is frustrating that all inquiries so far have yielded so little: one Phila monsignor indicted for criminal endangerment.
http://www.bishop-accountability.org/AtAGlance/reports.htm
The classic defense by abusers is minimization.
Fr. O’Leary’s appraoch gives support to those who would use it.
Claire is right and get your priorities in order.
I have little hope for the US.
Have we heard anything from Philly yet on the rumored Rigali departure?
I kept thinking if we had another thread on abuse in Kansas City, we could label it “Indecent Surplice.”
Bob Nunz, you have not read the report, I suppose. The classic media technique is exaggeration and demoniziation. Abusers of course minimize their misbehavior, but whiile the report corrects this factor, the final picture that emerges does not, as far as I can see, amount to a chronicle of horrors such as we saw in Boston or Philadelphia.
Claire, my sympathy is not about potential future harshness but about priests whose lives have been ruined by unproven allegations, or by an excessive reaction to what seem in general minor transgressions i the 70s or 80s when the norms you refer to did not have the Sinaitic gravity they have retrospectively acquired. Of course sexual abuse occurred; the priests in the report admit this themselves. But we have seen some very odd cases — for instance a priest who did something improper with a 16-17 yo, case is considered insignificant by the Director of Public Prosecutions, then in the climate of moral panic is revived, suspended sentence with scolding from judge — and a lot of the cases seem to be of this kind. The sleepy fields of Cloyne diocese are not a big American city and the grubby fumblings of abusive clerics there do not seem to reach the decisive level of the ‘child rapists’ that the media would love to find. Note the reference about to “the rape and sodomy of children by priests and bishops” — as far as I can see the offenses are in mostly in the relam of “interference” (touching) and in many cases with 16-18 yos rather than with young children. It is not minimization to seek to establish a correct profile of the offenses.
I share Msgr Callaghan’s skepticism about the bureaucracy and the efficacy of its prescriptions. I think there is a lot of truth in what the irishsalem website says. http://www.irishsalem.com/
Callaghan calls for a pastoral approach — I would say the State should practice such an approach too.
My sympathy is not confined to fellow priests, but to teachers who committed suicide. And I wrote in the Irish Times yesterday (on mandatory reporting legislation): “This opens the door to a regime where allegations, suspicions, perceptions, rather than serious and proven wrongdoing, will be enough to ruin many people’s lives.”
I notice that social workers in Ireland agree with me: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2011/0716/1224300822722.html
Or is it that people are recognizing that if the code the clergy are supposed to observed were imposed as law on everyone, then every other walk of life would become as surrounded with suspicion and fear as the clerical state is. Some of those to the fore in lambasting clerical fumbles are very soft on sex with 14 yos (as the push to have Oscar Wilde honored in place of Abp Dermot Ryan oddly revealed).
One of the reports linked here describes a repeated pattern of “tight embraces” and kisses, with the question, “Does that feel good?” after the first one.
We’re out of “lonely man” territory and into attempted grooming right there as far as I’m concerned.
attempted grooming of an 18 yo is usually called seduction. “grooming” is used in regard to children.
Again, you don’t know the mindset of the bishop — if every gesture of affection is given the nastiest of labels possible, we are entering an ice age of coldness and mistrust between people.
Father O’Leary –
Until you get a chance to read the Cloyne report, see again Claire (7/15 2:29PM) on what the report covers. What you say you cannot see is, by design, not meant to be there.
Until you get a chance to read the social worker article to which you link, you should be aware it has absolutely no connection whatsoever to anything you have said here. Their concern, unlike yours, is the large number of abuse cases.
The institutional Roman Catholic Church has lost all credibility, trust, and moral authority in Ireland because of repeated actions by bishops, priests, and nuns. Any claim to privilege or respect has been forfeited in light of the history recorded in the 4 reports to date. The reverence for various Church rules recorded there suggests that adherence to the one on the confessional seal may not be quite as rigorous as you imagine if the national law changes.
Your downplaying abuse because it was “grubby fumblings” in “sleepy fields of Cloyne” shows a complete lack of familiarity with the phenomenon. See Carolyn Disco (7/14 8:47PM) for a few quick highlights.
The Irish department in charge domestically is named after a cardinal virtue – Justice. Worth a meditation.
Father O’Leary, I’m not ready to dig into the dirt to extract counter-arguments. It’s too upsetting for me to engage in an extended discussion. So I’m just going to go with the conclusions of the Cloyne report, and leave it at that. We’ll just have to agree to disagree on that subject.
The flimsiness of the Cloyne report is shown by the fact that the only concrete impropriety anyone remembers in it is that a bishop hugged a young man. There is no evidence that the bishop had ulterior intentions; the question he asked may have just been out of consideration for the young man, to ensure that he was not uncomfortable with the affectionate gesture. St Philip Neri used to tell his young disciples that he would not caress them if they behave badly — Roman, Italianate customs to be sure (though I learned of this from the stern Victorian Newman).
Jack Barry, the social workers talked about a flood of allegations, not of proven abuse.
The basic point is that legalistic obsession with mandatory reporting is a poor substitute for a more human and pastoral approach.
Americans should know that “Justice” can be an ass — as we saw in the perp walk of DSK. I think the Irish can do without American-style justice.
Carolyn’s reference to a rape case has nothing to do with Cloyne.
A question I am unclear about is this: did the Cloyne report find that the bishops had disobeyed State law, or only that they had failed to follow their own guidelines?
Background to the Cloyne cases is found at the astonishing irishsalem.com website:
http://www.irishsalem.com/individuals/accused/bishop-john-magee/index.php
Mr. O’Leary, regardless of the age of the potential victim or the perp, trying out one’s moves on a person to whom one has a relationship of trust that should not include sex is grooming for abuse. Seduction implies the possibility of free consent, which can’t happen when there is a power imbalance like that between cleric and parishioner or teacher and student.
I was a (modest and virginal, for what it’s worth) young woman in college in the late 70s and early 80s and had to deal with unwanted attempts at “seduction” by faculty. They resembled the conduct described in the article. They would now be described, much more accurately, as sexual harassment or as grooming.
OK, I see that “grooming” can also be used of sexual harassment. However please note that the police judged the bishop’s gestures could not be categorized as abuse. If a professor embraced an 18 yo student in that way, he would be putting himself in danger and could be “perceived” as a sexual molester. But this would not necessarily be a correct perception. In practice now professors never touch students in any way and never make verbal comments that could be interpreted as expressive of erotic interest. Whether this is necessarily a totally wholesome development is a moot point.
Some more replies to the Cloyne report:
http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/david-quinn-where-is-the-media-frenzy-when-the-state-fails-children-2822335.html
http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/lise-hand-unholy-war-on-cards-as-angry-gilmore-takes-aim-at-the-vatican-2822330.html
http://www.independent.ie/opinion/letters/lack-of-accountability-endemic-in-church-2822397.html
I should add that the situation is more fraught for elementary and high school teachers. It may sometimes be necessary to touch a child in order to reassure or comfort him — but teachers or relatives otehr than parents are now exposed to suspicion if they do so — I suspect a lot of children are deprived as a result.
“The rape and sodomy of children by priests and bishops and the complicity of hierarchs is the greatest scandal to befall the church since the crusades and Inquisition.”
I agree. But please note that in the diocese of Cloyne no priest, as far as I am aware, has been accused of actual or attempted sodomy (buggery), active or passive, with a minor. The abuses confessed are more of the order of molestation — mostly dating from the 1970s and 1980s.
Irish priests are answering back: http://www.associationofcatholicpriests.ie/2011/07/brendan-hoban-on-the-debate-over-the-seal-of-confession/
If the bishop’s behavior, Italianate or not, with the potential seminarian was anything like what was reported (and I wouldn’t concede this too readily) without doubt I too would have been “creeped out.” But if I were still interested in becoming a priest I would have simply applied to another seminary. Surely there are other bishops and seminaries in Ireland who would welcome an additional candidate. One byproduct of the priest shortage is that seminarians and priests have gained important leverage against bishops – - who knows, maybe a full scholarship could be gained. Imagination can supply many other possible counter-measures short of going to the gardai and eventualy finding the incident discussed by serious people in an official government report. We are all going to be creeped out at one point or another, probably numerous times. But just as we shouldn’t accept candy from a stranger so likewise we shouldn’t expect the government or other worthies to investigate every such report.
Ironically Uber-Atheist Richard Dawkins recently discussed a proposition made (or not made) to a woman in a Dublin elevator and finds himself in almost as much trouble as the Bishop who kissed the boy in Cloyne. The nuances of being creeped out are apparently the subject of great interest across all belief systems, among atheists as well as Catholics.
“Can Richard Dawkins still credibly pose as a champion of rational thinking and an evidence-based approach? In my opinion, he certainly cannot, at least not in the way he did before.”
http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/david-allen-green/2011/07/richard-dawkins-chewing-gum
All this grave and learned discussion should eventually enable us to assign a creep-out score to each individual based on his or her net creep-outs, i.e., the number of times creeping others out less the number of times being creeped-out by others, with each incident weighted by the intensity of the creep-out, certified by authorities, and expressed in both an annual rate and a lifetime total of creep-outs. Ideally these measures will be useful across cultures, sexual orientations, historical periods and all belief and non-belief systems. If ample compensation is available for creeped out victims the problem should resolve itself very shortly.
Father O’Leary –
Your “Irish priests” is one man, Hoban, quoted on the site of a minority protest group whose Objectives include:
http://www.associationofcatholicpriests.ie/objectives/
….
“A redesigning of Ministry in the Church, in order to incorporate the gifts, wisdom and expertise of the entire faith community, male and female.
“A re-structuring of the governing system of the Church, basing it on service rather than on power,
“A culture in which the local bishop and the priests relate to each other in a spirit of trust, support and generosity.
“A re-evaluation of Catholic sexual teaching and practice …. ”
His one concrete example comes from a Hollywood movie. Invoking him as an advocate of conserving a tradition does little to help in addressing the very serious multiple issues now facing a country and Church.
A wide variety of sexually related behaviors doesn’t satisfy the definitions of “actual or attempted sodomy (buggery), active or passive” which you look for. Yet, they are abhorrent and unjustifiable if imposed on the lesser person in a power imbalance, as catarinasdaughter et al. point out. The bishop’s actions toward the teen-aged potential seminarian may not have been criminal abuse, but he reportedly had already passed through the hugging, kissing, whispering sweet nothings stage on several occasions. A reasonable observer, had the bishop invited one, would wonder where he was heading.
Distinguishing right from wrong requires more discriminating criteria than the presence or absence of major criminality. This applies to the previous Papal Nuncio who refused assistance and the Congregation of Bishops advising as much as to the local Church leadership now described in 4 independent reports.
Patrick Molloy — a good point — how many men can say they have never made inappropriate gestures or creeped people out? (In Flaubert’s ‘Education Sentimentale’ there is a cute line, when one man is over affectionate to the protagonist: Cette familiarite lui deplut — this familiarity displeased him.) I suppose many seminarians are discouraged by perceptions of homosexual affectivity among the clergy. The young man in the Cloyne report has already decided not to be a seminarian before the incident with the bishop.
Jack Barry, I see nothing wrong with the mild manifesto of the Irish priests. I see nothing wrong with quoting Hitchcock’s ‘I Confess’ — it is after all the most famous representation of confessional secrecy — though Antonia Bird’s ‘Priest’ would be closer to home. Brendan is a skilled journalist and knows how to make things vivid to his readers.
I am not denying that sexual abuse took place in Cloyne — but I imagine that if any of us had the courage to hire detectives to examine the whole past history of our immediate family we might root up just as much dirt as the hyper-expensive police and legal fuss around Cloyne has done. As you admit, ‘major criminality’ is not much in evidence. Meanwhile major criminality goes unpunished, even rewarded, in Irish society.
Interesting of compare Cloyne and Chichester (Church of England): http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sussex-14143721
Read Tom Doyle in the Irish Times about what “pastoral care” as practiced by Irish bishops really means. Also, Cloyne establishes clearly the role of the Vatican. We had an outstanding panel on clerical narcissism at the SNAP conference last weekend; it’s really all about “them” (not the victims or survivors).
Cloyne facts expose the pathology of the church
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2011/0716/1224300819359.html
“Msgr Denis O’Callaghan, Bishop Magee’s point man, openly opposed the framework document because it did not provide an adequate pastoral response. This masks a fundamental misunderstanding and misapplication of an authentic expression of pastoral care which is not an excuse for minimising the fact sexual violation of a minor is a serious crime in both canon and civil law.
WORSE STILL WAS the use of pastoral care as a justification for protecting the accused priests at the expense of justice for the victims. The report saw the misuse of the pastoral concept as a “scheme whereby counselling was provided to the complainant in a manner which was hoped would not attract any legal liability to the diocese”.
There is no evidence of effective pastoral care in the past or even today, only crisis management.”
Has Tom Doyle read the Cloyne report? Does he know anything about Cloyne? His piece is just a repetition of what he has said a million times.
I wish all would remember that men, including priests, are physical, sexual beings, bound to make slips at various stages in their development. As the great and humane Newman said, “Men, not Angels, the Priests of the Gospel” http://www.newmanreader.org/works/discourses/discourse3.html
I must say that in my experience Msgr O’Callaghan is an deeply pastoral man, and is so perceived by the priests and people of my diocese and the neighboring Cloyne. I do not accept the idea that he is a cynical manipulator of victims.
Where is Doyle’s evidence for saying the Msgr O’Callaghan lacked pastoral concern for the victims? (Recall that many of the cases refer to incidents that happened 30 or more years previously.) In the case of “Joseph” he could hardly have got more attention than he did. We have one woman’s claim that O’Callaghan got ratty and suggested she might be prejudiced against gays — but it seems to me that any conversation on such delicate matters can be misremembered, misundersttood or mispresented. Should bishops and priests just say nothing, just call in the cops? And what good would that to the victims or those who perceive themselves as victims?
That O’Callaghan may have blundered would not be surprising, but I wonder how much better those who condemn him would have done in handling these delicate situations. “Just call the cops” is not a human or Christian reaction.
As far as I can see the CofE diocese of Chichester has experienced exactly the same difficulties as Cloyne. This suggests that it is misleading to treat the problems as uniquely peculiar to the culture or structure of the Roman Catholic Church. I notice that the Chichester revelations have not sparked the same pitch of venom and rage against the CofE and Ireland is currently experiencing against the RCC.
Fr. O’Leary –
You refer to these matters as “delicate” matters. There was nothing delicate about Bishop Magee’s repeated behavior. Making a pass at a child or young adult is not a trivial matter even though it is not rape.
It’s long past time for you to face the fact that what a few priests have suffered from a relatively few false accusations pales in comparison with what other priests have done to thousands of children, including what they have done short of rape. Your minimization of the suffering of these children is truly astonishing. You still don’t get it.
Fr. o’Leary thinks anyone who disagrees with him hasn’t read the report.
But he goes on and on minimizing , while Ann hits the nail on the head.
Thank you, Bob and Ann.
This comment from O’Leary’s blog repeats the same theme about Tom Doyle:
“I do not believe he read carefully the correspondence to which he refers, namely http://www.commonwealmagazine.org/blog/?p=6811.”
That was the thread where O’Leary commented at length on his views about mandatory reporting by priests and psychoanalysts, as well as other controversial topics.
It could be seen as a more generous approach than assuming the matter at hand was read carefully, and judging the respondent is either hysterical, or on a witch hunt.
Herewith, a suggestion for me: stop taking the bait.
I agree that Carolyn Disco’s suggestion for herself has great value for a wider application.
Joe is joking. You’ll know he is finished with jokes when he stops quoting Newman in anything remotely related to sexuality. Voluminous research around the Venerable Cardinal’s beatification and in earlier years ended up with him remaining the preeminent sexual puzzle of his time, an era that also gave us Oscar Wilde, Victoria, and Peter Pan. He is symbolic, depending on the context.
I apologize for my hasty remarks about Fr Doyle.
I insist, however, that it is not clear that the bishop made a pass at the boy. I suppose that Magee was well aware that the young man was heterosexual. I further suppose that many heterosexual young men accept to give comforting hugs to gay men, even old ones. I further suppose that all the bishops had in mind was such a comforting hug, and that he hoped the boy was not uncomfortable with that.
I quote Newman because Newman refers to such comforting hugs (in times of stress he would bury his face in his male friends’ cloaks), yet no one doubts that Newman was chaste, platonic in his affections. Research on Newman’s sexuality does not leave him as “the preeminent sexual puzzle of his time” — Geoffrey Faber, “The Oxford Apostles” back in the 1930s penned his sexual character quite convincingly. The puzzle is created by Ian Ker who scoffs at any suggestion that Newman was homosexual in orientation and even claims to have proof that Newman was heterosexual.His writing on this is certainly voluminous, but unconvincing and imperceptive. If I am in denial about Bishop Magee, Ker is far more transparently so about Newman; but there are powerful ideological reasons for the Church to buy Ker’s picture — very bad reasons of course.
There’s a very strong Puritanical odor about recent comments here. Patrick’s pointer to the New Statesman article
http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/david-allen-green/2011/07/richard-dawkins-chewing-gum
fits in perfectly. It’s a small article, but halfway through I became creeped out and had to stop reading. Thanks for including it, though, Patrick. Reality checks are indispensable. It’s always good to know what’s currently correct to think.
The Irish Times has a useful summary of the allegations against individual priests. http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/0714/1224300713984.html
David Smith is right.
So McGee was in hiding in the us (said to return in a few weeks to Ireland,) Wonder who he was hiding with???
Abp Martin is right: be angry and see that the Church has much yet to learn and that includes Fr. O’Leary and Mr. Smith.
Carolyn – apologize for not replying but once O’Leary gets started (as John Page said well), I lose all interest. His defensiveness of the all Irish clerical world is well known on this blog and his “19th century” male sexual antics are outdated, embarrassing, and immature. His memories of these priests/bishops is probably 40 years old – yes, they may have been nice and good men; even good priests but we are dealing with events today and in the recent past. Yes, the pendulum has swung too far in the other direction at times; so what. Magee’s actions towards this seminarian are a side issue and should not allow us to be diverted from the more important points of this study. O’Leary’s comments again are the institution’s meme – notice that they do not ever start with what the victims have suffered, are feeling now, etc.)
From Diarmund Martin’s response today:
- “…..while he believes the Catholic Church is a much safer place today than it was before, it has still not learned lessons from previous mistakes.”
- “…..says that those in the institutions of Church or State who had acted wrongly or inadequately should assume accountability
- “….My first thoughts on reading the Cloyne report went back to that liturgy and to those who organized it and took part in it. I asked myself: what are they thinking today? Are they asking themselves if that entire liturgy was just an empty show? Were they being used just to boost the image of the Church?”
- “anger at what had happened in the diocese of Cloyne and at response – or non-response – that was made to children whose lives had been ruptured by abuse;
• anger at the fact that children had been put at risk well after agreed guidelines were in place which were approved by all the Irish bishops;
• anger at how thousands of men and women in this diocese of Dublin must feel, who have invested time and training to ensure that the Church they love and hope can be different would truly be a safe place for children;
• anger at the fact that there were in Cloyne – and perhaps elsewhere – individuals who placed their own views above the safeguarding of children, and seemingly without any second thought placed themselves outside and above the regime of safeguarding to which their diocese and the Irish bishops had committed themselves.”
- “The Church cannot continue to be present in society as it was in the past”
Other documents that have been released over this long week-end:
a) appears that the Diocese of Cloyne spent 10 times more money on legal fees than counseling (well, there goes the “pastoral” approach)…and, in some cases, the counseling money was not given to the victim but to a trust or community based or association that provided counseling
b) use of the term “pastoral” by O’Callaghan – excellent interview three years ago with the RTE and this past week. Highlights – asked how he felt when he failed the victims; he responded – “In what way?” He stated that the gardai where not interested in “historical cases?” and that he always reported these cases – just not immediately because at times the cleric may have been sick or on holiday. Asked if he failed the victims – he stated:
“well in hindsight, …..”
Link to interview three years ago: http://clericalwhispers.blogspot.com/2011/07/bishops-history-of-lip-service-to-child.html
Highlights:
- “He spoke slowly, a man who clearly believed in the importance of his every utterance.”
- “Dr Magee, to me, seemed like a man who was not used to having his actions questioned; a man who knew little about humility.”
- “Constantly, we were led to believe he was obliging us. There was an air of unreality about that encounter as he waxed lyrical about his commitment to child protection.”
- “There was this distinct air of unreality about the meeting, about the overly deferential relationship between this man and his subordinates. Not once did the bishop make reference to the scale of disregard for child protection that was contained in that report.”
Even the current administrative bishop over Cloyne seemed at a loss that Magee was not in the country or available to respond to the release of this report (release that has been known and prepared for weeks). O’Callaghan is on vacation?
Appears to be more legal manevuering than Archbishop Martin’s call for accountability.
(side note – what do we really know about Magee – private secretary to three popes; does this really qualify one to be a bishop? seems to have wanted to be and receive his episcopal appointment as a “reward” for his dutiful jobs? Is this again really how a bishop should be elevated? Appears that his life for 20+ years was in the insular Vatican – little to no pastoral experience or even daily ministerial and sacramental work. He was an institutional secretary foisted on this Irish pastoral diocese because he was a good soldier. The ultimate in company politics. Appears that he knew little about the abuse policies and could have cared less. Being made a bishop should come from the diocese and be a call to increased accountability, responsibilities, and work – not a comfy reward and a life that is basically part retirement.)
Carolyn – as I have often said, until bishops go to jail, there will be no change in the clerical world.
Bob (7/17 11:58 am):
Abp Martin is right: be angry and see that the Church has much yet to learn and that includes Fr. O’Leary and Mr. Smith.
I don’t know about anybody else, but you’re certainly right about me. I still haven’t got started on Italian grammar, and the summer’s more than half over.
Bill,
Your research is very helpful. How refreshing to read Diarmuid Martin, in addition to examples of what is considered “pastoral” outreach.
I am very familiar with the surreal quality of discussions with bishops: crazy-making.
Their cluelessness has become self-deception, and then denial. Oblivious, but certainly not innocent. I have a special fondness for our attorney general’s choice of words: conscious ignorance, willful blindness and flagrant indifference to the dangers children faced.
Has all that ontology has gone to one’s head?
Please indulge this excerpt:
When McCormack was asked if the church had made mistakes, and had not acted in the best interest of victims, he replied (interview April 2002):
“I don’t think I would put it that way as much as I would say–although I think that is the perception and can be even the understanding of some people–but looking at it from the inside, according to the best understanding we had of the times about these men and what they were doing, and that would vary according to the individual, that in having them sent [to an] evaluation and treatment institution, you’d get clinical understandings of men whereby some of them it was never recommended that they be returned to ministry.”
Would add one difference – McCormack was stating the 1980-1990′s excuse ….blame it on the psychological approach, PhDs, psychiatrists, treatment centers (even tho we know that many bishops ignored the medical community’s direction and advice).
The Cloyne Study hits home because it is current – not the past. One of the three major points is that Magee did not follow or implement the very directives in 1997 that all the bishops of Ireland agree to. Even after the public USCCB events and Dallas Chapter and the three prior reports from Ireland itself….Magee and O’Callaghan acted as if nothing had changed.
The ongoing Murdoch scandal with so many top-level firings and resignations is in sharp contrast to the Vatican’s retention of *all* it’s wrong-doers and even the promotion of some.
The British scandal got it’s impetus from the mistreatment of one family of a murdered child. The Brits just wouldn’t stand for it. The Vatican has allowed the mistreatment of thousands of holder and their families, and not one bishop’s head has rolled. Incredible but true.
Thousands of children, that is.
Msgr O’Callaghan was always a critic of the zero tolerance and mandatory reporting guidelines that Abp Martin trusts in. He chose, correctly, that there was no point in dragging old men into public disrepute on the basis of iffy claims about what they did 50 years ago. I am sure he also treated the complainants with pastoral sollicitude, since that is his mantra. I wonder if you folk would automatically apply guidelines that could kill an old man and plunge his family into anguish, all on account of the most remote of allegations.
I am sorry that my observations on sexual psychology are perceived as Victorian. I just got this info on contemporary sex psychology in my combox: http://www.ipce.info/newsletters/e_22/2_16_Lee.htm
Fr. O’leary–
You seem to think that where there is no repentance, asking forgiveness, and appropriate retribution that guilt somehow fades with age. It doesn’t.
Joseph O’Leary –
You raise the issue of what is just and proportionate punishment for what one wise Cardinal termed soul murder. The solution you wonder about may be as close as ordinary humans can get to the right answer. Remember also, one of the purposes of just punishment is to protect public order and safety by discouraging inert souls that might be inclined to tolerate or commit similar crime in the future. (In today’s paper, a rapist was sentenced to 90 years in prison without parole for a single incident.)
I see Abp Martin defends the seal of the confessional and also says that priests should not be forced to report abuse when the victim does not want it reported. http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/0718/1224300883351.html
Jack Barry, I said nothing about proportionate punishment for rape or abuse of children.
I am talking about allegations. I believe that any of our families, if a public sollication of allegations of sexual wrongdoing in the 1960s were enacted, could find themselves in deep embarrassment. In one case in Cloyne someone complained that he had been abused by a priest a long time ago, but could not remember the priest’s name or his parish. Similarly someone could claim that he or she had been abused by a member of your family, but could not remember who or where. The Murphy report says the Cloyne diocese should have instigated a diligent inquiry to find you who that errant priest could have been.
Jack (7/17 8:37 pm):
You don’t see a problem with that, Jack?
O’Leary, are you insane? Do you realize what you just linked to? Beneath your own name?
@Felapton –
O’Leary has spent all day fighting for the cause. Why are you surprised? The next step may get him into Graviora Delicta territory, though, and that’s serious. And that stuff doesn’t belong on Commonweal, O’Leary.
@David Smith –
No.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/montgomery-rapist-sentenced-to-90-years/2011/07/15/gIQA1iM1GI_story.html
It seems odd to me that there’s so much intensity here on the part of commenters who want to see people severely punished for sex crimes. This is, after all, a Catholic journal. One might have hoped for more willingness to forgive and less willingness to condemn. I wonder if this strongly punitive attitude is characteristic of the people who read these comments but have chosen to remain silent.
My link, sent to me by a rightwing Catholic, is intended to show that the contemporary moral landscape is very different from what you who accuse me of being an out-of-touch neo-Victorian would like to think. Note that the link is from Peter Tatchell, who has given voice to adolescents directly. I frequently quoted adults who gave similar accounts of what it was like to be an adolescents and invariably got the reply that I was speaking of the past, or quoting arty-farty intellectuals. Tatchell shows that my views are even more up to date than I imagined. On adolescents’ rights to sexual choice I believe that an age of consent of 15yo would be a good compromise.
American Justice is all about punishment. Death is the backbone of American Justice.
The rest of the world is more merciful, knowing human weakness.
I note that Abp Diarmuid Martin in his sermon says that he himself would probably make mistakes the same as others — and why? Because as a bishop he could not apply a blindly punitive conception of justice but would have to consider the pastoral welfare and human rights of both victims and alleged victimizers.
IPCE is bad, evil stuff, and associating your name with them could get you into awful trouble. There are people around the Internet who would like an opportunity to make trouble for you. (I am not one of them.) Think about what happened to DSK; in matters like this, in which it is often an accuser’s word against the accused, reputation can make all the difference. It is not enough to be innocent.
The screws in this part of your brain are loose, Joseph. For God’s sake,be prudent and have nothing to do with Peter Tatchell and Rory Connor.
I suspect the rapist who got 90 years was a black who could not afford a lawyer.
I see the combox comment on his case delight in the thought that he’ll be raped again and again in prison.
“You are lowest of the lowest, loser with a capitol L, now you can be someones Bltch for the next ninety years and just remember not to walk on the grass in Hagerstown. The Guards have a way of waking you up at three in the morning and you aint nothing but a boy in a white redneck world that you cant control. So take a long walk on the grass and enjoy the wake up call…”
Racism and rape fantasies are the stuff of punitive American Justice. And of course torture.
What is IPCE?
Peter Tatchell is evidently an honest and heroic man. When he burst into a meeting of Anglican bishops the respectability-junkies walked out but the melior et sanior pars, including Canterbury and York gave him a respectful hearing.
O I see: http://www.ipce.info/newsletters/e_24/report_2_ipce.htm#thinks
I think my own views are clear: I do not approve of sex with minors, though I think the age of consent should be reasonable. I also think we should try to understand the phenomenological reality of all these situations, with a sense of nuance and complexity. The crudities of American Justice are no good.
Be prudent and have nothing to do with Rory Connor (irishsalem.com) says Felaapton, echoing the very words my relatives used to warn me against David Norris in 1980. Now David Norris is seeking the Presidency and same relative is a warm supporter!
Fr. Bleary-
Your great compassion seems limited to the sinners, not the sinned against. How can such so-called charity dismiss the claims of justice without a hearing from those sinned against?
Or do you think that generally the predators aren’t really guilty of anything very serious unless it’s rape.
Sorry, should be O’Leary.
Ann O, of course not. Interfering with kids is very, very wrong, even if it consists only of touching or obscene words or gestures. I just don’t like the way all molestors are called “rapists” because it gives a misleading impression of the substance of the majority of the alleged activities. I note also that people often become sex offenders unwittingly, as in many sexual harassment cases, whereas one can hardly become a rapist unwittingly (apart from some ambiguities of date or marital rape).
I’m saddened y the continuous stream from Fr. O’Leary, He now thinks himself an expert on ‘American justice;” and trots out oversimplified views to help bolster his other now more and more pitiful whinings including his putative knowledge about secual harassment etc..
There’s also the meme of “compassion” -here in New Mexico, the now arested former deputy to the head of UNM charged with helping a large prostution ring excoriated the curent presi for lacking “compassion.”
Didn’ twe hear cries for compassion for the former IMF head or for Ms. Anthony and even a bleat at the end of “Phantom” from the phantom himself?dent
BTW, it’s now expected that:
Rigali wil be out in a wek or less in Philly;
-BXVI wil colapse the number of diioceses in Ireland (a big improvement??)
The beat goes on…..
Joseph, the basic problem here is loss of trust. If I walk into a party with my husband and immediately begin chatting up various and sundry men, he is unlikely to be suspicious if I have been a faithful and loyal wife. If, however, I have a history of cheating he might start wondering whether I am having or planning another affair. Like it or not, and I regret it greatly, many priests, and certainly those with relatively high rank in Ireland, are in the position of the known to have cheated spouse — that is, needing to be even more cautious and concerned about their image than a person would otherwise need to be if they don’t have the same history.
All of this debate over the nuances of what should be viewed as suspicious or whether particular acts that took place so many years ago should be investigated — it all goes back to the failure of the Church to take action WHEN IT MATTERED — when it could have shown that the Church was worthy of trust and worthy of its own values. It didn’t — which means even small incidents will arouse suspicion and distrust because no one will view them in the isolated terms that you do — instead, they are laid over a nearly completed canvass where they are viewed in a context that is deeply unfavorable.
TO view the incidents in isolated terms is essential to justice. You do not presume the guilt of black men accused of rape or murder because of statistical frequency.
Only one incident of wrongdoing has been proved in a court of law, Fr Wrixon’s mutual masturbation with a 16-17 yo 30 years ago (his suspended sentence was possible only on the basis of his pastoral relationship; the activity as such is legal in Ireland since 1993). Some priests (pseudonymous in the report) confessed incidents of child abuse in the past. Of the 9 cases Msgr O’Callaghan is accused of hushing up, most are a matter of ancient and obscure allegations; do we throw old men to the wolves on such a basic?
Irish priests of every stripe are unanimous in denouncing the proposed laws making the confessional a police listening post and dragooning priests as STASI snitches (for other crimes as well as child abuse). The latest voice on this is that of Des Wilson: http://www.associationofcatholicpriests.ie/2011/07/suggested-new-laws-about-disclosure-des-wilson/
Joseph, how can I put this? So few allegations have been proven in a court of law in no small part because the Church assiduously acted to make it next to impossible that many priests could be tried individually, through refusing to refer them to criminal authorities and all manner of other stonewalling and covering up — so that now, you can say that all these things are so old and so on. The point is, having been instrumental in denying justice, the Church now comes to the table with what we call unclean hands. The saying is, he who demands equity must himself be equitable. Justice is never going to be wholly one-sided.
Fr. O’Leary –
You are just repeating yourself now — poor old priests, their offences weren’t so bad, it’s too late to prosecute them anyway, there weren’t nearly as many as the 4 essentially Victorian reports claim in the first place.
The only claim that you make that makes sense is that it is a terrible thing to make false accusations, but nobody is disagreeing with that.
You’re a broken record.
To change gears from O’Leary; here are two links to thought provoking articles.
http://ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/my-friend-arthur-and-discussion-sex-offenders
http://ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/reflections-upon-reflections-sex-offenders
Some experts have laid out a global issue we confront today – sex trafficking and its impact on women globally and how this issue is very similar to where the world was in the early 19th century in terms of slavery. Laws protecting children and women from abuse are not consistent across the world – they vary by age; they vary by those who tolerate or profit from treating human beings as sexual objects and keep the age of adulthood very low.
Within this global issue, we, in the US, have our own city, state, county abuse laws that vary; criminal and court systems that can be cruel to young abusers; ignore family and psychological history, genetics, etc. Yet, the tension is always there between how strict must society be and how do you protect your children.
Unfortunately, the church finds itself behind on this issue because of the failures of bishops and Rome. Victims suffer; priest abusers suffer.
But, would not recommend that the way out is “cheap grace” or, in other words, easy forgiveness. The question is not one of age of the abuser; the question is one of justice which requires penance, making restitution (which many mean jail time, suspended sentence; listing on an abuser list; movement to an abbey or monastery – why does being an “old” cleric exempt you from this?). How can you assume that the clerical abuser doesn’t want the truth to emerge – how can he find peace without it? Again, forgiveness and healing is about the community; not focusing on an individual. And the above applies to bishops also – why are they exempt?
It is a difficult situation – realize that some clerical abusers are victims themselves. But, you can not stop being a victim unless you take responsibility and accountability for your own actions. There needs to be a balance between the needs of the vicitms and the clerical and episcopal abusers…….but we need to start by listening to the victims first; not offering an easy pass because of age, outdated structures; unfair laws, etc.
Barbara, Ann, your remarks bear little relationship to most of the Cloyne cases, though of course they apply to other cases. Note that most of these cases were not covered up in the 30 or even 50 years between alleged incident and actual accusation (as Barbara suggests) — they were not known of at all.
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/0714/1224300713984.html
Bill Haas’s links seem to give an insight into just the kind of American Justice that can only be destructive. I want to ask a forbidden question: are the young men in the incidents, Arthur etc., Afro-Americans? It seems to me that draconian sexual laws are a great way of practicing racist persecuation under another name.
O’Leary –
Some prime targets of American justice, charged in connection with sex crimes, can be seen in this picture – all 5 Caucasian, 3 showing Roman collars:
http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2011/02/10/philadelphia-da-to-charge-priests-teacher-in-sex-abuse-case/
Read Felapton 7/17 9:28 10:18! He’s trying very hard to tell you discretely that you are heading for a fate you obviously don’t imagine. What goes on the Internet stays there forever, usually. Google doesn’t forget.
Joe – you chose to miss my point. The story of Arthur is not the story of the 15 priests highlighted in the Cloyne Report. Arthur is barely 20 years old; has never led a “golden” life of privilege which each of these clerics have; and never had the advantages of education, money, or class – at least with Arthur we see the complexity and dysfunction of both his life/choices and the legal system’s response.
So other data – 30% of all incarcerated folks in the US are there for drug use – not dealing but first or second drug related offenses. These crimes are basically victimless – 50% involve being in the wrong county or state and so not having laws that see drug abuse as a medical condition warranting treatment; not imprisonment.
Compare that to clerical sexual abusers (time period means nothing to me) – as well pointed out above…in most cases, protected by both gardai and church; covered up; delayed so that no law can apply to them; excuses and payments to cover up their damage.
There is no comparison between the Arthurs of this day and the abusers named in the Cloyne Report.
Priests in Cloyne hardly have a privileged life. Salary would be very low. Residence in presbyteries, sometimes in poor repair, changes every few years as the bishops decides. Pension? Perhaps $8000 dollars a year when you reach 75. Class? Sons of peasants or small shopkeepers. Boys like Arthur have a rich sexual experience when very young; most Cloyne priests had no sexual experience at all as young priests, hence their incredible naivete (the priest who made a pet of a little girl calling her “my Lolita” – unaware that the word Lolita has a sexual connotation). Money? I doubt if the priests in the report have a fat savings account. Protected by Gardai? On the contrary, the Gardai’s efforts have been specifically directed to the flimsiest allegations or suspicions against priests. “Time period means nothing to me” — except that 50 years makes matters extraordinarily unclear, surely. If we were talking about grossly evident matters such as physical rape, your point might stand. But claims about touching — as we saw egregiously in the accusation against the bishop himself (and this is not a time-gap one) are very subject to doubtful interpretation and perception. Delayed? The major delays in Cloyne were the decades between alleged incident and complaint. “THe abusers named in the Cloyne report” — here you presume guilt quite cynically. Many of the priests were targets of one (1) allegation, which they strenuously denied (except in the case of the guy who had died 30 years before the allegation). The link you gave showed American Justice at its foulest, ruining several young (black) lives; Irish justice is not that bad, yet.
Jack Barry, you are bringing the language of threats against freedom of opinion and freedom of speech, the tactics of a bully. Examine your conscience.
Felapton by the way is “she” not “he” — her penname is a mathematical term.
Jack Barry, Phladelophia is not Cloyne. Solid and credible reports of abuse are precisely was are lacking in most of the 9 cases in which Msgr Callaghan spared clerics. Did you read anything about this? Did you read the link I sent earlier? http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/0714/1224300713984.html
A brutal rush to judgment is the keymark of American Justice, as we saw in DSK’s perp walk and in the link to Arthur’s story above. The rest of the world should be on its guard against a society that has a vast and lucrative prison industry with an incredibly high population of inmates, as well as a deep faith in the virtues of capital punishment.
Fr. O’Leary–
You seem to have forgotten how to read. In all the cases described in the Irish Times article serious probleMs and accusations were ignored.
I give up.
One of the cases is an allegation against a priest whose name and whose parish the victim could not remember. Of course it happened in the past. It was not ignored; the very fact that it got into the report shows that. The report thinks that Msgr O’Callaghan should have instigated a more diligent investigation to track down the possible offender. This is the sort ot thing the report is mostly about. Ann, if people made allegations against relatives of your own (“some relative of yours, I am not sure who, or where, a long time ago, had an abusive relationship with me”) would you rush to the police with a list of all your relatives, urging them to find the abuser?
Just how delirious the Irish frenzy is can be judged from my collegemate Tom Carew’s facebook discussion:
http://www.facebook.com/#!/permalink.php?story_fbid=207655212618534&id=513930934
I picked one case at random just now:
“Fr Darien died in 1997, a few months after a complaint was made about him. The complainant, “Rona”, said she had been sexually assaulted by him when she was aged about 16 and working in the laundry of a girls’ home in the 1960s. Nothing was done about the complaint because, Msgr O’Callaghan said, Fr Darien was terminally ill at the time. The commission says proper procedures were not followed. There was no reporting to the civil authorities and no further inquiries were made.”
“Sexually assaulted” could mean a touch or gesture interpreted in this way. It is not clear what is meant (not in any case rape). 30 years had passed. This was the only allegation against the dying man. (By the way, the allegation would concern pastoral abuse rather than pedophile offenses; it might not even be a gardai matter; the Wrixon case was at first dismissed by the DPP and revived only because of witch hunt pressures; he got a suspended sentence for a confessed pastoral transgression. Sex with 16 year olds is legal in Ireland today. If you say we should think of what the law was then, you would have to imprison all homosexuals who were sexually active before 1993.)
I want to hear Ann’s considered reply on the case just mentioned; what precisely would she do in Msgr Callaghan’s place?
Here, on the other hand, is a disturbing account of the legal tactics of the diocese: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2011/0719/1224300946807.html
Mary Kenny has her say: http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/mary-kenny-why-the-confessionals-seal-must-remain-sacred-2823875.html
Bill Haas, 2,200 Irish priests have undergone Garda vetting, and the Gardai are urging the others to do so as well. It is not to priests that the Gardai are turning a blind eye, but to many other sites of abuse, notably within families.
I have not read the entire report carefully but I did read over sections 10-26, the sections about the accused priests.
I agree that there is very little serious matter in there. Many of the cases concerned very old complaints, foggy memories and dead or very elderly priests. The rest involved ambiguous testimony, victims who did not seem to really have been underage, victims who did not wish to talk to the civil authorities, and so forth.
This does not mean no significant incidents took place. Serious and unambiguous incidents are usually (in the twenty-first century) reported directly to the civil authorities. Moreover, it is not clear how many incidents the diocese did report, only that they did not report these.
It seems the main reason people are annoyed that this information was withheld is not because they want to lock up aged or small-time molesters. It is because when subsequent accusations are made, this sort of information can be used to establish a pattern of misconduct. Consistent testimony from witnesses who do not know each other is one way accusations like this can be substantiated.
But in general, I agree that a lot of the uproar is a conditioned response to ten years of discreditable revelations, not a reasoned response to the data in this report.