A proposal for dealing with priest perpetrators

"Every priest credibly accused of sexual abuse would be offered participation in this program."

How is it just to have someone merely "credibly accused" be placed in a clerical leper colony? What happened to having to either prove guilt or elicit an admission, as required by canon law (both the universal law and the Essential Norms/Charter)?

The threshold for punitive action seems to be getting lower and lower.

These provisions would be the Christian way of treating things. That would be a novel approach!!!!

What will be done of the bishops and provincials? It can stop at the pedophile priests. The whole coverup scheme and schemers have to be undone as well. If these were women, what would Rome do to them?

Excellent proposal, but is there any chance the Bishops would implement this? I would also open these residences to former priests who were jailed adn then released. From what I understand, they are rarely given ANY treatment in prison. They will leave prison and abuse again, just in another venue.

Mary Gail makes some sense. The immediate reaction of the U.S. Bishops was to expel the offending Priest, thus protecting the Diocese from any further lawsuits. The English Bishops reminded their people that even offending priests were still human beings and still members of the Church.

Some Religious Orders have done something like Mary Gail suggests, though the supervision is often rather lax.

It's good to hear some one mention the religious provincials. The role and numbers of vowed religious in this crisis have not received the attention deserved.

As to the substance of the proposal, I think it does not take into account the level of talent of the men accused. That they should be supervised, I certainly agree. That someone with a doctorate in scripture (e.g.) should be making candles seems like a terrible waste of education. Because these men have crossed grave boundaries doesn't mean that they can no longer make a contribution to the life of the church. It will take some creativity to see how such contributions can be best offered safely, but it certainly is imaginable.

wow. a new approach to an ongoing problem. I think I'll need to ponder and pray on this one.

I suppose this is a more Christian way to handle the situation of abusive priests. However, I still have a problem with the fact that they are still being treating above the law of the country in which they are living. It doesn't seem right that they would be given this nice type of incarceration when the rest of the public would be thrown in jail under less than favorable conditions.

"A priest who loses his vocation, home, manner of dress, and circle of colleagues is at risk to regress and to re-abuse."

----------------

Just one offensive sentence from the offensive essay.

Who cares if a criminal loses his "manner of dress"?

Who care if a criminal loses his "circle of colleagues"? They are guilty of not ratting him out to law enforcement. The priesthood is rotten to the core, from the seminary to the papal palace. Pretending there's a "program" for dealing with those who rape children is to enable the perpetrators to continue.

Candle making?

I am a little surprised that this superficially good idea was put forth by a psychologist. It attempts to exert control over a sociopathic population that is so sick that it usually does not see itself as doing anything exceedingly wrong, i.e., the abuser nun, priest, brother or bishop usually finds a personal reason why he or she "needed" to act out.

If you have ever actually met one of these people and spent time with them, it can be a life changing experience. They are evil personified and usually they have no real will to change or even to recognize the depth of evil that they have descended into with their behavior. They need to be incarcerated in some sort of community, but I am not sure that a monastic model is appropriate or even necessary.

A prison is probably not appropriate either for many reasons. The best model is probably a Catholic psychiatric hospital for many practical reasons as well as moral ones.

I would not allow them to practice as priests or clerics/nuns of any type. That gives them power that they have shown quite clearly they do not deserve and cannot handle.

The truth is that people attracted to the life of a nun, priest or brother are odd ducks in many many ways and trying to make them even more odd by virtue of their surroundings would not accomplish much for either them or the population of people they abused.

No, they must be incarcerated with the possible exception of using some sort of psychiatric hospital matrix to hold them. It is the only way to protect the community at large from their predilictions.

I would be very worried that their priesthood, which often created the ideal conditions for abusing others and escaping consequences, would continue to make it easier and safer for these priests to re-offend.

I've also wondered whether, psychologically, being a priest allows the offender to feel righteous and proud and perhaps to fail to confront their guilt and crime.

The priesthood can't be used as a hiding place for perpetrators, nor should it allow them to feel superior to regular sinners and therefore delay their conversion.

It is difficult for lay people who hold priests in high esteem to hold these contradictory views of the same person - sinner of the worst sort and simultaneously, priest in good standing.

Certainly the Church and the Bishop should be concerned with the future of priest perpetrators but I would have no problem with seeing these men defrocked.

Mary Gail Frawley-O-Dea, it seems, lives in a magical kingdom, where everything can be fixed, a perfect place. Her unrealistic proposal is dangerous.

The real world is not a perfect place, because humans are imperfect. Those who commit the heinous crime of sexually abusing criminals should not be coddled just because they're priests! These men are criminals who prey on children! Frawley-O-Dea's "Penance, Productivity, and Provisioning Program" is impossible to maintain, unrealistic in its goals and foolish in its expectations. We're talking about grownups here. Pedophile priests are not priests, should never have been ordained, and should not remain priests. It is their own responsibility to discontinue denial, get treatment and stick to their program. The alternative is jail. Every last one of these men should be listed on a national website of sexually dangerous persons and have no respite until they effectively address their addiction to sexually abusing children. The damage they've done to our church is bad enough, without our having to provide them with a cozy kingdom of their own. How unfortunate the Frawley-O-Dea was the only mental health professional to address the USCCB in 2002. A more realistic perspective might have received a better reception.

Don't you think that the Penance is just a wee bit over the top. I could never condone their actions but what part of the disease mode are we not taking into consideration here. Is it untrue that those who perpetrate were mostly victims themselves. I think it is fine it provide for a place of prayer and sanctuary. I do wonder if lifetime self imprisonment for those who are damaged and more than likely without supervision would hurt again. but is there not a place for one on one supervised field trips. Museums or a restaurant some diversion would more contrast when returning to the abbey or whatever. at what point does this noble and thoughtful program become less about the perpetrator and more about vengeance. I think we forgot to put Jesus in the thoughtful response to this problem.

Who would pay for this lifelong facility?

Fort these perpetrator priests who are not agreeable to live in an dedicated facility and who want to leave or who are forced out, you suggest to cut them off without salary or benefits. This is immoral. Even though they have sinned and are criminals, they are still entitled to a pension, a health plan and possibly other services for the years they have served the church. Even if they have left or will leave the priesthood, the diocese still morally owes them a pension for their service. Morality works on many levels. The Church is often negligent in keeping up its moral obligations. The 25,000 priests who have left to marry have received the same immoral treatment from the church. Archbishop Milingo who served the church in Zambia for 20 years and for an additional 25 years in Rome was cut off without a pension. This is immoral. Archbishop Milingo is entitled to his pension but is being immorally denied it by the Vatican. Bishops barely reach out to their own priests once a year, don't expect them to reach out to those who have left under a cloud. The Married Priests are still waiting for that outreached hand and most have never seen it. Most have never seen a pension either.(Married Priests USA)
http://www.orgsites.com/ny/married-priests-now/

I'm not sure if this is meant to be satiric or not, but any Catholic parish, school, university or other institution should be forbidden from subscribing to this poor excuse for Catholic journalism. And credentials should be denied to any of their employees at Catholic events.

I think Frawley O'Dea plan of Penance, Productivity, and Provisioning, is excellent. There should also be a plan of Restitution, Recovery, and Renewal for the Survivors of abuse by Catholic Clergy with the same follow up for life as she suggests for priests.

Good idea, although it's long on compassion and short on punishment. What about the bishops and cardinals who enabled these criminals?

This seems to me to be a much more Christian approach to this serious issue. I would also hope that in this process the victims would be given the opportunity to face their perpetrators and those who have abused them would be expected to ask forgiveness. Frawley-O'Dea has referred to an interesting reaction to all this. Expelling the perpetrators (both in civil society and in church) pushes the reality of these crimes from our midst and frees all of us from dealing with them. It seems to me this is another way of "not talking" about it which was how everyone dealt with these issues decades ago. Not dealing with a problem does not solve it or heal it, it just goes underground and does more serious damage over time. Maybe if the church dealt with it in this manner it could lead society in a more humane response and less emotional. If there were a healthier way to deal with the issue more levels of society might be able to find the courage to confront the issue (in families, schools (private and public), etc. It would be helpful even in such an horrible crime to be more rational. Finally, I cannot help but notice how seldom women who have abused is dealt with in church or society. Sadly sexual abuse is an equal opportunity sin and crime.

I am sorry to disagree with the writer. Treatment centers were very much like what she proposes. People inside a center have told us that the promised monitored sequestration just didn't work, that priests left the facilty with ease. Where is all the money needed for such monitored sequestration going to come from? From us Catholics I presume. I don't want to ensure such care for a pedophile or ephebophile and criminal by reaching into my pocket. There are far more deserving charities. If it was up to me there would be no pension for these men either. They owe us money. Their actions have cost us dearly emotionally and financially. Again, they and the bishops are to blame and they owe us money. There is another reason for the laicization of these predators. They were not ordinary laypeople. They were loved and admired and listened to and we received the sacraments from them and told them our sins and looked to them for guidance. We believed because they told us that ordination changed them and made them other Jesus's. As long as they remain priests (even if it is in name only) they and the bishops will continue to treat them as priests. Their basic sense of themselves is already skewed. Taking care of them will just emphasize in their minds their "specialness."

My concern is what about the bishops and heiarchy that covered up these abusive priests? My strong opinion is they too be held responsible and be treated for their actions in this matter. This whole situation stinks. Especially when a Archbishop is placed in a position ahead of a Church in Rome UGH!!!

Mary ODeas proposal is wonderful but totally unworkable. As a chuldhood victim of clerical sex abuse and following closely the actions of the leadership in my church, they are so confused and disjointed on any sex abuse issue---and priests and Bishops being totally pampered, protected, spoiled, and clerically arrogant---any small percentage of universal agreement needed would be impossible to attain. Additionally, it does sound like a Catholic prison for priests---and we know already that all that prisons do is protect normal society from the criminal. Lifting the statute of limitations and persecuting both the perpetrator and the Bishop enabler would go far to protect normal society. We have had priests and Bishops who have raped and abused children----AND THEY ARE STILL AT LARGE!!!! Wake up everybody ----- these are felony crimes against children!!!!!

Dear Ms. Frawley-O'Dea:

I congratulate you on a significant advance over the American bishops' rule of "one strike and you are out." And I would like to make these suggestions. First, there should be a proposal like yours on how to deal with episcopal predators and with the bishops and other clerical leaders who didn't behave responsibly toward the predators and their communities. Second, the bishops responsible for the accused priests, or the bishop of the locality of the facility, should meet with the priests much more often than once a year, perhaps once a month, taking this as a prime pastoral mission, thus showing the priest and the Catholic community that a bishop cares deeply about what has been done by the priests and about the priests themselves. A similar episcopal mission to the victims should be undertaken, thus making it clear to the victims and their families and to the bishops themselves the cost of the unconscionable distance that has become custom between the bishops, their priests and the people who were victimized. The bishops need to be re-introduced to their always sinful charges. Finally there should be an end to all "amputation," pace Monsignor Scicluna who apparently wants to "amputate" and the American bishops who support "one strike and you're out." Out where? We have all had enough of ruptures accepted and even fostered by leaders of the Catholic community. What, exactly, is the Church for? The "diseased" should be at the heart of the Catholic community, not exiled from it.
Gratefully yours,
William M. Shea

We as Christians can make such pronouncements, come up with such charitable plans, which would benefit the penal system itself. What I like about this is that it seems to put the responsibility and onus onto the Catholic priesthood and hierarchy to heal itself, to face this horrible problem and take it on as their burden, their care, their penance in effect. I do agree however that the Church cannot be its own monitor in this: the pattern of cover-up, of sparing the offending "brother" the onus of his monstrous sin, the minimizing of its monstrosity, must be made impossible for the Church. In a way, the whole hierarchy should be making this penance, taking on this way of life. It has shown itself unable to stop committing and then sidestepping the consequences of these near unforgivable abuses.

Your simplistic solution will never work. What do you mean by credibly accused ". That the abuse took place but the statue of limitations prevented prosecution ? Do you think that this would satisfy the Victims ? These priests should be removed and made to fend for themselves , maybe their next vicitm would be that of a legislature or high ranking politician ,then there will be all kinds of laws enacted to prosecute the perps. The pope and the catholic church feel that the children who are victims are expendable and this is the cost of doing business. The public feels 'it ain't my kid" so what do I care. The catholic church is more interested in saving money than saving 'SOULS'. There is another solution, STOP DONATING !!!! No money No church !!! Let them all fill out applications at WAWA. The only cure for pedophila is when they die.

I think you are really on to something with this approach! Might need some fine-tuning to recognize the individual talents of each one of the accused, but your ideas are wonderful. Thank you.

Sounds like life imprisonment to me. Anybody even partially in his right mind is going to take his chances with the secular authorities and a trial by a jury of his peers. Even if convicted, he probably wont get life.

This wont happen because the RCC hierarchy wants to kill the church at all costs.

... and yet any priest who is interested in the ordination of women and does anything towards this will be excommunicated. Where is the care and compassion for these priests and for women? Why wouldn't their 'amputation' matter at all,and why can't they still be allowed to be attached to the church? It seems that to be a pedophile is a far lesser sin than to encourage women to be full participators in the life of the church.

There is much merit in these proposals. For bishops who have covered up the scandal (think Bernard Law of Boston, for one), Pope Benedict should say to him, "You will spend the rest of your life in prayer and penance in a hermitage on the grounds of a male contemplative monastery outside your home country." End of prestige, power and and wealth.

This idea is all very well and good, but let's not forget the clergy who have been accused and reported by the bishop to the police may very well be taken into custody. Bishops are not about to look the other way now and face likely obstruction of justice charges from the district attorney.

The days of families keeping big secrets for 25 years while the good padre hides behind the bishop's apron are rapidly drawing to a close

If the priest in custody is found guilty, he faces a prison term. Regardless of what the bishop or a clinical psychologist have in mind as a program of treatment for him.

Why does everyone seem to accept the fact that bishops and provincial superiors are getting off free?
There has got to be something we can do, other than saying they should be responsible but they aren't, so too bad.

Why on earth should priests, bishops, and cardinals who rape children, even one child, be living at Club Ped crafting together? Why would they not be imprisoned for the rest of their lives? Why on earth are their colleagues who enabled them still saying Mass? It is no small crime to make a living introducing evil into the sacred as a catholic priest.

Dr. O'Dea gave a scholarly and heartfelt address to the nation's bishops at the Dallas conference in 2002. She was largely ignored, addressing men with neither courage nor integrity.

Does anyone actually believe that Jesus of Nazareth would want these perverted men all living together singing Kumbaya as catholic priests?

AW

Interesting, but the candidates must be found guilty, not just accused. We need to scrap their statue of limitations and bring them to trial. Too many evil ones hide behind it.

Methinks the author is looking for job security. "One size fits all" is hardly holy! Draconian, much? And how awfully patronizing . . . crafts?! Candlemaking?! Serously?!