Ten reasons the Vatican's new abuse guidelines will change little

So when does SNAP file a RICO suit on behalf of the Philly victims?

Reason #11: You can't let this go because if you do, you won't have an income stream and will have to go get a job like everyone else. So you're going to ride every whiff of news into the sunset, howling like Chicken Little that someone's pants are falling and it's the Vatican's fault. When David Letterman does his Ten reasons, we all know he's making a joke. When you do it, we should consider it a Stupid Dog Trick. The Vatican says something, and you start drooling.

WELL SAID SNAP ......................David, you have spoken truthfully and pointedly. It is business as usual in Rome. For once, I will rest my case. Let us hope Bishop Morris soon tries to bring together a group of bishops to at least begin a discussion about renewing our Church from top to bottom.

I absolutely agree. You have bishops in the United States who TO THIS DAY refuse to work with any Review Board, ie Bishop Fabian Bruskowicz. This will not make any difference. In addtion, I worked in a parish for 20 years and Finance Boards and Parish Councils, which are ADVISORY only, have never had much influence with a pastor who wants to do the opposite of their own board's advice. Guidelines are pure window dressing to give the impression that the Bishops want to do the right thing.

Well written, David. These new guidelines tell us to put all our trust in the bishops. Considering that Bernard Law, Justin Rigali and Ray Burke are the powers who have and will select the bishops in this country, I believe a healthy skepticism is in order.

"there is no cadre of truly brave, outspoken bishops"
So true, and one of the saddest sentences I have ever read.
Good thing there are still brave, outspoken laity. Thank you, SNAP.

Thank you, David, for this depressing but insightful article analyzing the "too little, too late" guidelines....And thank you so much for your support as I have worked to draw attention to the tragic replication of hierarchical mistakes by Dignity Dayton/Living Beatitudes Community and DignityUSA. DD/LBC leadership knowingly allowed Ellis Harsham to preside at mass for ten years after he had been suspended from the Archdiocese of Cincinnati for several credible, and one substantiated, allegations of child sexual abuse--not to mention having admitted to them giving pornography to one of the children involved (who also claimed molestation, and received a large settlement from the archdiocese). And both they and DignityUSA are covering this up by concealing the extent of their previous knowledge and enforcing only a fake and deceptive "resignation" which allows Harsham to serve in many ministry capacities--just not as main presider/celebrant--and to remain in the worshipping community and attend social activities without necessary safety guidelines. The story appeared on page 10 of the May 5 edition of NCR, but did not make the website, and contains one factual error by the reporter--the most famous accuser, Steven Cook, who also accused Bernardin and recanted only in Bernardin's case, was a high school pre-seminary student, not a seminarian. It also contains numerous deceptive statements by Dignity President Mark Matson and Dignity Dayton presider Fr. Tom Stricker, and -- if reported correctly -- a tragically inadequate DignityUSA policy allowing presiders with credible allegations to retain their positions and allowing those removed for substantiated allegations to worship in the community without appropriate safety guidelines and full disclosure. DignityUSA members and chapter leaders, and all who care about the safety of LGBT and ally children and the good name of LGBT and affirming clergy and communities, please visit my blog for fuller information on the case and help call for real reform in Dignity Dayton and Dignity USA. Bloggers: please link and comment at your own blogs as public attention is the only thing that will complete this reform process of our wonderful but presently mis-served organization. stjuniatheapostle.blogspot.com

NCR hates Pope Benedict XVI.

They hate everything about him and everything he stands for.
They hate him because he won't ordain women.
They hate him because he won't allow a married clergy.
They hate him because he is not a 60's hippie.
They hate him because he is so intellectually superior to them (and they really hate to admit that)!
They hate him because they absolutely hate the Catholic Church.
They hate him because he is so thoroughly Catholic.
They hate him because he is so joyful (and they so wish he were not).

They hate him because in their hearts they know he is right.

They just hate him.

Yes, as they say: "Too little, too late." Just call the police! That's all any of them need to do and should be obligated to do. The police can investigate whether the accused abuser is guilty or not. This shouldn't be up the the church.

The major reason it wont work is the heirachy puts their canon law, which protects only them, above the laws of God. canon law is like shiria law, nobody knows what it is.

Since nothing the Church can do will ever satisfy David Clohessy, why give space to this perpetual malcontent?

Chicken, say hello to Fox.

Reading your article, you are not interested in eradicating child-sexual abuse. The only concern clearly detectible in your article is your concern for who has power in the church. Please do not use the tragic experiences of the abused to advance your political cause.

Remember: 96% of the clergy did not abuse. The number of new cases since the mid 90s have been radically reduced (although one is toooo many!). In contrast, child sexual abuse in the US and in your neighbourhood, in your schools is alive and well! So, if you re really interested, then do some real work!

in continuing with what one of you has written I can tell you NCR staff are dishonest people who are trying to bring issues up just to fuss the Church. Why do people keep supporting these guys?. They should shot down this site not because it is a dissenter but because it does not build the Church.

The guidelines are an allowance for the principle of subsidiarity. However, after reading Clohessy's comments, I wonder how effective any procedure will be. After years of footdragging,today, nine more names emerged in the Buffalo diocese,with more to come. And in one notorious case, one priest's name is being dragged through the mud, while a canonical investigation is going on. No civil charges have preferred.

At the moment I have to agree with you David.
There is no mention of dealing with the shameful attrocities committed against vulnerable women either, coerced to sign confidetialities. Retired but now deceased Melbourne QC Charles Frances, was no stranger to that.
He was a good man.

We will see if they do any good. Frankly, if my child was abused, the last place I would take my complaint is to the chancery. The District Attorney will not have a problem with different dioceses. The problem in the past is parents did not go to the civil authorities soon enough. The district attorney may have the final say after the bishop. Philadelphia may lead the way.

Calling the police may be effective in 1st world countries, but what about the rest of the world?

I do not for the life of me understand why some consider it impossible to do 2 things at the same time: 1) Respect the common rights of priests as we do anyone else and 2)also make the environment safe for children and filter out abusive priests or anyone else. I for one can walk and chew gum at the same time, so why can't some other people do the same?

Wierd stuffs seems to be happening and strange claims are going about that seem to make much of this similar to some medieval system for sorting out witches.

All of this thunder and fury seems to be about 2% of the priests. In Philly from what I understand about 4000 priests have been through that Archdiocese in the past 30 years or so. Some things were very bad several decades ago and we are left with a residual 20 or so, some very old me, some no doubt guilty of something significant in the past, some suspected for petty things like giving a teen boy a drink or giving him his telephone number.

As I understand it, there is the question where a priest may do something that in no way make him liable for any criminal conduct, but is considered inappropriate. For such cases we have "boundary issues". OK, the review board can not order any of these priests or deacons to be liacized or removed from all ministry. But they can and should put the bishop or diocese officials on notice that such guys are suspecious and that it would be best to find ministries that do not deal with children or teens for such priests.

There is going to be some tension, no doubt about it when we are dealing with such numbers like a thousand in a major city, but we can live with that.

But if the DA is going to just jump on some geriatic priest for something unsundry that happened 10 years ago, this will only create more confusion.

When I was growing up we had something called "teacher's pets". I suppose today such situations would be highly suspecious, but there is no reason to "call the police".

Thank you, David Clohessy and SNAP.

Without your constant advocacy and the courage of survivors, we would know nothing about the corruption of bishops who criminally endanger our children and obstruct justice.

You warned that bishops' audits were only self-surveys, and now finally even the auditors themselves admit as much. With no access to personnel files and the rules set by bishops, how could it be otherwise?

You warned about predators still in ministry, while bishops insisted there was no safer place for children than the church. Now Phila DA's prove otherwise and even Bob Bennett of the original National Review Board says Phila is not "an anomaly" and that "These things (failure to adequately investigate abuse charges) are pretty universal."
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/pennsylvania/119674059.html

Guidelines like these have been put out by bishops since 1992, and almost 20 years later, we still don't have anything like bishop accountability. http://www.nccbuscc.org/comm/kit4.shtml

Keep up the good work, for the sake of all our children.

The Archdiocese of Miami was sued because of the sexual abuse of a child by a youth minister, Mr. Ricco an employee of the ARCHDIOCESE OF MIAMI, at SAINT LOUIS CATHOLIC CHURCH in Pinecrest, Florida. RICCO's supervisors at SAINT LOUIS CATHOLIC CHURCH, including Paul Herring, senior youth minister, and Fr. James Fetscher, pastor, had been advised and informed that ANTHONY RICCO was a child sex molester long before RICCO sexually assaulted JANE DOE. Specifically, they received the first of multiple prior complaints and allegations of child sexual abuse against RICCO as far back as November, 2004 but did not report it to authorities as required by law. Three girls complained but nothing was done. It wasn't until the fourth girl,who was sexually abused in 2006, complained to the priest and senior youth minister after which nothing was done that the parents went to the police. (ttp://www.renewamerica.com/columns/abbott/070307)

Not only did Mr. Herring and Fr. Fetscher not take any action to protect the New Life youth group children once they learned of RICCO's dangerous propensities, they instead placed him in a position where he could molest more girls. they sent RICCO with the New Life youth group on a field trip to Stowe, Vermont in April, 2006. On that field trip, RICCO sexually molested multiple girls including JANE DOE.

An apology was issued which reportedly came out of the settlement with the young girl said, "The Archdiocese of Miami extends an apology to Jane Doe for its role in the harm caused to her and asks for prayers for all those in the youth ministry who were adversely impacted by such events. The Archdiocese of Miami will continue to prevent future violations." (http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/abbott/070307)

In 2011 parents filed a lawsuit against the Archdiocese of Miami alleging that their 11 yr old son was sexually abused in 2010 by a Music teacher/youth minister employed by the Archdiocese of Miami. The latest lawsuit says that the school and archdiocese had received complaints about Cala since 2000 and that the archdiocese undertook "no investigation or responsive action." http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2011-03-11/news/mh-broward-parents-sue-...

Our good Archbishop Wenski has has taken a characteristically hard line on the abuse cases. "The whole system of justice is a sham if you're going to be presumed guilty every time there is an accusation," he said. According to lawyer Herman, "Archbishop Wenski hasn't handed over a single file on these priests. They talk about being transparent, but still they hold all the files."

The Pope and Archbishop Wenski of Archdiocese of Miami keep expressing hollow words that they will continue to prevent future violations but the archdiocese continues to made no attempt at an investigation or responsive action in sexual abuse complaints. In both of the above cases there were numerous complaints with no response from the Archdiocese. The "bull" continues from our Pope and his hierarchy/clerics and our innocent Catholic children continue to be sexually abused.

Howard

Bishops like Diarmuid Martin in Ireland, Geoffrey Robinson in Australia and Thomas Gumbleton in the Unites States are isolated by their peers while prelates like Bernard Law formerly of Boston and Justin Rigali of Philadelphia are tolerated and even promoted

Mr. Clohessy, what you say about Robinson and Gumbleton may well be correct, but I would like you to share the proof for what you say about Diarmuid Martin?

For many years now in British Columbia Canada we have had laws in place that make it manditory to report abuse or suspected abuse. Having worked with young people in care I often had to tell people,"stop, if what you are about to tell me involves abuse you need to know I have to report it." I can't remember a single incident where someone stopped talking. Many people did however thank me because they were unaware of the law.

If for instance a case goes to court and someone is called as a witness and it turns out they did suspect abuse and didn't report, they can than be charged.

I agree with one of the postings, in that, there needs to be "best practices" regarding 'abuse' suspected or actual and it should be manditory for all bishops and dioceses world wide. If we the church truly believe in protecting children then we make it the rule, period!

Why is it that all the hate filled comments are here on NCR. When I go to some of the more 'conservative' websites and read their articles, they do not allow for comments by anyone (sometimes paid subscribers). Please don't talk of sensorship when all of the conservatives come here to castigate us who want a better Church because they have no other place to vent. They also don't provide a forum of their own. This is the only place that allows full and open comments by ALL.

So please if you want to discuss ... then discuss. The ad hominem attacks are pointless, childish, and sel serving. They don't sway anyone. They only spew hate ... just like Jesus did? If these attacks are your idea of a Christian Church, then I think your Church might not be so Christian.