Belgium cardinal tried to keep abuse victim quiet

Yes, perhaps it would be good for NCR to accept the offer of Fernand Keuleneer. Then one will have more information (but still probably not all)and can decide for oneself if there is more to this issue than what is now presented and if this piece is, indeed, a "character assassination".

Prove it, Femand..I think NCR's reporting is more honest than any of your statements. You have lost your credibility and hurt and harmed the church(laity) more than you realize. And for the priests that are not pedophiles you could care less about them. Because of your dishonesty in dealing with this situation for 1700 years these men are totally discouraged and have no support.

The heirachy needs to step down and the religious sisters, the laity and the honest priests need to reform the church in the vision of Vat. II. I feel it was a sad day when JP II was elected. Very charismatic man and obviously a good actor but I am beginning to think he was a real chameleon. And he started this movement back to the Middle Ages. The Middle Ages was a time that no one made them answer for their actions. It was not a more holy and respectful time. Now with the development of media, technology, etc they cannot hide. It is time to pay the piper, gentlemen....

Sorry, Attorney Keuleneer, we are more than sated with legalese wordsmithing and our BS detectors are highly tuned after eight years of reading secret archives, depositions of bishops and cardinals, and the rationalizations of counsel.

You have a difficult job interpreting and dissembling Danneel's quotes so that white becomes black and black, white. Zenit, the Legion of Christ's pseudo news service, already undertook the challenge, quoting Danneel's spokesman Toon Osaer. The experiment fails miserably.

Misdirection, non-sequiturs, evasion, non-denial denials, and just plain old lies can't overcome the truth here. Please, stop the spin about character assassination. Danneels’ words are very clear all by themselves, thank you.

It was John Locke who said, “The actions of men are the best interpreters of their thoughts.” Intent is negated by actions that contradict it, so forget resort to good intentions to imply innocence, much less holiness.

Danneels refused to take any action to hold the abuser accountable, not even by reporting him to the pope, adopting a do-nothing approach at all costs; warned the victim about going public; suggested guilt on the part of the victim (obscene!), and pushed forgiveness on him, in what has become the “f” word for survivors.

Danneels’ marked concern for the abuser outweighed signs of compassion for the nephew, who objected painfully to Danneels’ lack of outreach. Clueless to the impact of sexual abuse, or rather in denial, the cardinal’s insensitive, grotesque demeanor and language, to the point of accusing the victim of blackmail is a disgrace, a chilling tour de force of serious crimes ignored.

I leave it to readers to determine what patterns of thought generated Danneels actions. A wounded, hurting victim is offered stone, not bread. The transcript is repulsive.

Save your breath, Keuleneer. We are really not that stupid after all, to swallow any twisted apologia for such incompetence and cruelty.

I'm sure you do regret that your client has apparently been caught red-handed, holding a smoking gun.

The transcript speaks for itself, don't you agree?

We have the diocesean "spin." I'm certain that your own spin will be just as interesting, but perhaps no more convincing.

Do carry on, nonetheless.

Fernand, do you realize how the cardinal is rationalizing his passivity and fear in response to this evil act. He, as a leader in the church, could have directed the offender to go public with his evil offense and still kept the victim's identity unknown. He could have directed the offender to explain as clearly as possible why he would commit this evil all these years when he knew in fact it was evil what he was doing. That is just the beginning.
However, what this does reveal is, at best, the immaturity of the cardinal in matters of interpersonal relationships and the fear that feeds his immaturity and passivity. This type of immaturity in church leaders is one reason why this evil abuse of children has gone on for so long.
Stop defending him and influence him to do the right thing and speak for himself so he can grow up and take responsibility like a man.

As an attorney representing Cardinal Danneels, your complete loyalty lies with your client and not necessarily the truth. As a result, what you would have to contribute to this discussion would be in service to the cardinal's defense. I suggest you save it for any legal proceedings and not an open forum designed to promote the truth of the Church, both positive and negative.

The "Purple Culture" and the "White (papal) culture" have a lot to learn and not a whole lot of time to do it either. Those pocket books are slamming shut across the globe and the patter of little feet going out the front doors of the church are getting louder and louder.

"Hooray for hidden recorders! Try to explain these conversations...."

Cardinal Danneels, like President Nixon of Watergate fame and his secretary, Rosemary Woods with her famous "18 minute gap" , have every reason to fear the destructive power of a hidden tape recorder.

Cardinal Danneels should not be making any plans to accompany the Roman pontiff on his visit to the UK this month. The two old dears could end up being arrested and made to appear before HM's Magistrate's Court.

Wouldn't they be a picture dressed up in t-shirts and orange jump suits? What a come down from the jeweled pointey hats, lace dresses, and the 60 foot cappa magna.

Also, what an ignominious end to the plenitude of papal power too.

"Isn't there an antidote for this mass narcosis that continues to retard Christianity from experiencing the kingdom Christ promised?"

Yes, there is an antidote to the faux Christianity that the RCC foisted on humanity when it crushed Jesus Gnostic followers in the early centuries after Jesus died. That "antidote" is an alternative to exising religions: the NEW SPIRITUAL PARADIGM explained in detail in Neil Donald Walsh's "CONVERSATIONS WITH GOD". It is one of the central points I make in my novel THE MICHELANGELO DECEPTION which has as its central theme that Jesus and other masters such as Moses, Lord Krishna, Lord Buddha, and Shankara all had their messages bastardized by followers who turned their messages upside down.

All masters in whose names extant religions exist, preached love and compassion as the way to salvation. Unfortunately, the RCC chose fear and terror as the basis for the "Christianity" they founded. We have seen the disastrous consequences for two-thousand years and there seems to be no end in sight.

All of this talk about "renewal" of the RCC--in a half-dozen or so variations on that theme--seems as ludicrous as painting a spoiled apple red when it is rotten at the core. Take the corrupt Vatican yoke off the people's necks and let them find their own way to salvation as hundreds of millions of non-Catholics have been doing since the Reformation.

If you think that is a notoriously radical idea that could never happen, remember the Soviet Union was also founded on the basis of fear and terror and the governance of that institution mirrors that of the RCC. The USSR collapsed from the weight of its own internal contradictions, the most prominent of which was that of a gross misunderstanding of humnan nature. It is that same misunderstanding that has plagued the RCC from the beginning and will until that grave injustice is recognized and dealt with for what it is.

How true and Bernard Law is an incredibly powerful cleric. He is on about 8 or 9 committees that are part of the curia. One of the things he so influential in and possibly has the last word on is appointing the American Bishops and cardinals. Yippee for us...more idiots and corporate "yes" men to continue our walk away from the Lord. It is up to the laity to make these people step down.

For example, instead of saying "wait" to the new missal which is another step in JPII and Benedict's rush back to the Middle Ages and the servitude of the laity why don't we just NO WAY are we going backwards. It took us long enough to get this far in the Vatican II vision. We refuse to go back to the Dark Ages. They have lost all credibility and they need to step down and we need to re-form the Catholic church with the teachings of Jesus as the center of our Church.

He already retired as Archbishop earlier this year...nobody has actually resigned from the Cardinalate since 1927.

You have your head in the sand and are afraid to see the truth that the cardinal is afraid of the truth also and wants to hide it.

Cardinal Danneels' request that the victim repent sounds as if he's been listening to his old buddies, Cardinal Sodano, Cardinal Bertone, or the papal legate in Washington. Or, perhaps,countless cardinals and bishops across the globe. Their arrogance, exhaulted sacerdotalism right out of 16th century Europe, and their dismissive attitudes displayed towards the victims, their families, and the Catholic laity to date MUST have the sympathy and the support of Pope Benedict. They wouldn't dare proceed with this strategy they've all been following without his tacit approval.

All of these aging queens need to retreat into the Egyptian desert and do penance for the rest of their days. Pope Benedict should contact John Paul's old friend, the Coptic Pope, Shenouda III, of Alexandria and see what arrangements he can make to get them settled in a nice cave church along the lower Nile. Out of sight, out of earshot, and outta here!!!

Cardinal Danneels' attorney SHOULD NOT be offering anything on behalf of his client on NCR or any other paper. The place to defend his client and anything he has to say about his client is in a Belgian court. The attorney is doing the cardinal no great favor.

Clients in the United States have fired and had their lawyers disbarred for less.

Dear Anonymous, Obviously, your bishop allowed this clergy and lay combo to take over his duties and responsibility. If all happened, as you say, then he more than likely wasn't up to the job of being diocesan Ordinary anyway.

The COUNCIL OF PRIESTS has no power in canon law to overrule a bishop anywhere in the Catholic Church, nor should it have that power. The bishop's office is of apostolic origin (priests are an outgrowth of the the episcopal office), but he must be made responsible to someone ,somewhere.

If he has to be removed for misfeasance or malfeasance , he should be removed by synods, and not by a purely advisory and consultative body such as the COUNCIL OF PRIESTS. No matter what the laity, which has no real power at the moment anyway, may have done in league with this Council of Priests.

The bishop needs to be elected, held responsible ,and, if necessary, removed by a process (a synod of laity, priests, and other bishops). Where he gets a fair trial within a legal structure of clergy AND THE LAITY.

Any bishop will more than likely get a better deal from his own local, episcopal colleagues , the people and his priests priests than he'll ever get from Benedict's Court of Incompetent Clowns sitting at the Vatican.

The Eastern Orthodox synodical system could be a very useful model, but it too isn't perfect. Nor can we ever expect to find a flawless institution of oversight anywhere.

"When the nephew stresses that the cardinal must speak to pope and that Vangeluwe must be sanctioned by the church, Cardinal Danneels responds "Yes but...You can also ask forgiveness and, well, you can also acknowledge your own guilt."

What part of that statement did you not comprehend?

A conversation is private only if both parties decide to keep it private. The victim and his family did the Catholic Church a world of good by getting this Cardinal on tape and on the record in order to eliminate any chance of deniability by the Cardinal. They obviously knew the character of the man they were about to converse with.

The cardinal's attorney will have his opportunity in court to defend his client. He surely gains nothing from representing his client here on the NCR.

Of course, we want to hear ALL sides of this story. However, given the context of this tape NCR has for us, the cardinal's "advice" is all too typical of the type we've been treated to by hierarchs across the globe: stall, keep quiet for now, buy time to "image manage", and obfuscation and eventually prevaricate if necessary. It all points to the same thing: the abused is victimized by the priest-predator and then again by his bishop, but in a very different sense.

Before the pope heads to the UK, he needs to throw open some windows and doors in the Vatican just as Pope John XXIII wanted to throw open the doors of the world-wide Church. There is a very disturbing and scandalous pattern of behavior and group-think emerging and Cardinal Danneels' troubles are pointing to it. The questions will not go away for the Primates of Ireland, Belgium, or ecclesiastics anywhere else. All these roads lead to Rome.

What did Pope Benedict know, when did he know it, and what did he do about it once he knew it?

The statue of limitation had long passed.

Let’s examine Zenit’s report and the statements of Danneels' spokesman. The story is exclusively from the cardinal's viewpoint, as though that is the only relevant material.

Zenit: “The former archbishop of Mechelen-Brussels is stating that he did not cover up the sexual abuse of a minor by the former bishop of Bruges….The cardinal's spokesman, Toon Osaer, issued the statement asserting that the prelate never tried to silence the case.”

Osaer must not have realized that Danneels’ successor, Archbishop André-Joseph Léonard of Brussels “pledged an end to cover-ups” when Vangheluwe resigned. (NYT July 12) Why promise to end cover-ups that never occurred?

As for silencing the case, when Danneels was informed of the abuse in 1996 by a priest, Danneels berated the priest and wrote him a threatening note. Still, Osaer maintains Danneels was to be a mediator “immediately after the abuse.” Huh?

Moreover, the tapes reveal Danneels’ profound concern for secrecy:

GD: I don’t think you’d do yourself or him a favor by shouting this from the rooftops….

GD: You could also say he will resign next year anyway, and that for example, he says, look, I no longer go on television and such. With things left like that, and you come to a year.

S (victim): No, I want it placed in your hands and then you decide.

GD: You can grab us and blackmail, hey, and say look, you have to do something.

S: What?

GD: You can blackmail and say, look if you do not say anything ...

S: Why should I want to blackmail? I'm not going to blackmail.

GD: Well, if you for example say they do nothing, and you bring it to public notice ... “
http://cathcon.blogspot.com/2010/08/danneels-tapes-part-i.html

I’d say Danneels is very concerned about “public notice” and silencing the case. The words speak for themselves. But Zenit accepts the following non-sequitur as evidence of not preferring public silence on the matter: “On the contrary, the cardinal agreed to facilitate a meeting last April between the victim, his family, and Bishop Vangheluwe” – as though discussion at the meeting was not negotiating how to keep the facts hidden, while getting the victim in line to let a private apology suffice.

Word fog everywhere. We are told Danneels condemns the abuse. Of course. And the point is? The last section about respecting all this confidentiality is manipulating the whole issue to protect bishops and the church. Zenit lets it stand unchallenged.

Danneels showed not respect, but unbelievable callousness toward the victim, who painfully spoke of the cardinal’s marked compassion for the abuser more than his target. The practice is for media not to reveal victims’ names without their permission.

Such verbal gymnastics left unexposed.

Most has already been done. There are still some remnants, but there will always be pedophiles and ephebophiles in the priethood These people have an incredible nack for fooling others.

It's time for the people themselves to get rid of and, in the future, DEMAND their approval in the selection of everyone from parish priest to the pope himself. Hold ALL of them to fixed terms of office. No bishop, no pope reigns for more than 15 years max.

There must be canonical structures established to remove criminous priests and bishops. A system of national and regional synods should be set up for just such a purpose. As well as other aspects of oversight--especially financial oversight of these feudal lords. Who still think they're living in the middle ages and believe they are in no way accountable to the laity for the expenditure of Church funds.

We can start with this pope and the entire hierarchy submitting their resignations. Each diocese throughout the world is set up to handle the sudden loss of the Ordinary. So, for canon lawyers to argue, it would be too much of a shock to the diocese for the Ordinary to suddenly resign is rubbish and it's laughable. Bishops die suddenly all the time. Life goes on!!