Pope to sex abuse victims: 'I am truly sorry'

WHERE DOES THE BUCK STOP?

In a press release from the Holy See on March 9, 2010, "concerning cases of the sexual abuse of minors in ecclesiastical institutions," Director Fr. Federico Lombardi simply repeats some of the more clichéd responses and predictable excuses to the church's ever widening problems of sexual abuse, particularly that of minor children.

http://www.oecumene.radiovaticana.org/EN1/Articolo.asp?c=362995

The institutional Roman Catholic Church has reacted to the continuing sexual abuse debacle neither rapidly nor decisively, contrary to what Lombardi states. The Vatican has attempted to distance itself from what has happened in country after country, first categorizing it as an "American problem," then as a "homosexual problem."

What was done by church leadership in the United States, for example, it was forced to do by the pressure of public opinion after records, files and correspondence were forced into the public venue in 2002 by Judge Constance M. Sweeney, a very brave, grounded and principled Catholic woman in Boston, Massachusetts.

The church's response continues to be reactive rather than pro-active while minimizing the systemic and endemic abuse of power and authority which has enabled and exacerbated it on the one hand while covering it up whenever and wherever possible on the other.

The "wide-ranging context" is that in countries from the United States, Canada, Australia and Ireland to Austria, the Netherlands and Germany church authorities have repeatedly and consistently disregarded its own moral and Canon laws as well as the existing laws of the countries' in which these horrific crimes against humanity occurred.

The church has lost its way.

Lombardi does not mention nor does he admit to the well documented widespread cover-up of the sexual abuse of children by bishops and other church officials in many countries like the United States, that makes the church's sexual abuse problems particularly egregious. If church authorities had done the morally right thing initially, one wonders how many children would have escaped being sexually abused by a particular priest?

As Patrick Wall, a former priest himself, states:

"The Roman Catholic Church has the largest body of knowledge of non-incarcerated sexual offenders in the world."

Who, one has to ask, would have more knowledge of the internal machinations utilized to cover-up and protect sexual predators from public scrutiny than Pope Benedict in his former position as Head of the Holy Office?

When are people of good will going to say, enough!

When are state legislators going to change the laws so that justice can be pursued for the thousands upon thousands of victims of childhood sexual abuse who have been unable to access let alone obtain justice?

In most states and probably in most countries, existing criminal as well as civil laws give more protection to sexual predators and their enablers then they do to victims of childhood sexual abuse by anyone. The problems with statutes of limitation which have expired are probably much the same in Germany and other European countries as they have been is in so many jurisdictions in the United States.

This is deplorable and should not be the case.

The removal of all statutes of limitation in regard to the sexual abuse of children is the single, most effective way to hold predators and enabling institutions accountable before the law. More than that, window legislation allows a set time frame for previously time barred cases of sexual abuse, by anyone. It is possible to change the laws in order to give some semblance of justice to those ravaged at so tender an age. What is needed to effect that change is the will to hold all sexual predators of children accountable along with any enabling individuals or institutions.

The state of Delaware is one of a very few states in the United States which has removed all criminal and civil statutes of limitation in regard to the sexual abuse of children by anyone. It also legislated a two year civil window for previously time barred cases, again, by anyone. That window closed in July of 2009.

In a civil suit, unlike a criminal suit, the burden of proof that any sexual abuse took place is on the plaintiff. The burden is not on the accused individual or institution to prove innocence, at least not in the United States.

Every victim of childhood sexual abuse should have a right to the pursuit of justice at the very least!

What people seem to forget is that children’s rights are human rights, that children’s rights are civil rights and that the hierarchy, the leadership of the Roman Catholic Church, has violated those children’s rights in the most profane of ways, not only by covering up for sexual abusers, mostly priests, but also by enabling the further abuse of untold numbers of children by these particular individuals who were known to be dangerous predators.

If Delaware can do it other states and other countries should be able to do it as well, and hold sexual predators and any enabling institutions responsible, especially when those institutions choose to ignore their own internal laws.

I was privileged to testify before the Senate and House Judiciary Committees in support of the 2007 Child Victims Law in Delaware.

No rules and no laws of any religious organization or denomination should be allowed to trump the laws of a civilized society where the protection of children is concerned.

Not only should the institutional Roman Catholic Church be held to the highest standard as a signatory to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, it should be leading by example and showing what can and should be done to protect children from sexual exploitation, from what really is just another example of trafficking in individuals for purposes of sexual exploitation, nothing less.

By any objective standard the church has grossly violated the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child for decades.

Perhaps it is time to formalize those violations as the crimes against humanity they truly are?

Sister Maureen Paul Turlish
Victims' Advocate
New Castle, Delaware
maureenpaulturlish@yahoo.com

Same old, same old? Will the visitation be public? I.e. transparent to the
People of God or secret again? Is there anything the Irish People of God can learn from the way in which women religious of this country have responded to the 'visitation'?

Same old, same old? Will the visitation be public? I.e. transparent to the
People of God or secret again? Is there anything the Irish People of God can learn from the way in which women religious of this country have responded to the 'visitation'?

The picture that accompanies the article says it all. At first glance I thougt the child was grasping the hand of a dead person, then I decided the person wth the child seemed to be standing and it must be a statue the child was smilingly venerating. Only when I read the caption did I see that the child was "shaking"? the inert hand of Cadinal Murphy of Armagh.

Of the three distinct classes in the Catholic Church, the child is the lowest of the low. First is the hierarchy, and even though Benedict says nothing in praise of bishops and cardinals, he uses that almost exculpatory passive voice: "it cannot be denied". I always wondered why Sister spent so much time teaching the "passive voice". Apparently it was so we could have some understanding of hierarchical proclamations. (Not) Second are priests and religious and finally lay people (who acknowledge that they are sexual beings!)

While I understand the hesitancy of Pope Benedict to further lessen the already depleted credibility of his brother bishops, It seems to me that his letter was altogether too political and insufficiently Christian.

We all learned that humility and an honest examination of conscience were needed for a good confession. We also needed to have a firm purpose of amendment backed up by resolution to avoid the occasions of sin. The pope's letter seems lacking in these requirements for a good confession. And as Hans Kung pointed out in his interview, Benedict needs to make a good confession of his part in allowing the sex abuse to continue when he served as prefect of the Congregation for Doctrine for a number of years under Pope John Paul.

None of us is greater than the little child in the picture.

I find it interesting that here, in the United States, the Vatican has an investigation of our Religious Sisters and is asking our dioceses to pay for it as well. Apparently Rome just doesn't get it: that a true investigation needs to start at home...at the Vatican, with the heirarchy of men who are running the Church. The scandals and abuses are caused by the men who are in charge of our parishes and our dioceses. That would be priests and bishops. It's certainly a time to consider reform in the Church, allowing women and women priests a greater role at the helm. I believe it will take a female approach to clean this mess up and re-touch the hearts of the faithful and the faithful who have departed from the Catholic Church.

The letter by the Pope to the people of Ireland is more of the same. We are sorry but........... I have no faith in the Church which I was born and raised in as they have been continually safeguarding themselves while risking the lives of hundreds of thousands of children. Their practices over time have ruined children's lives and I can no longer trust their words of "zero tolerance". They have not done it to the present so how can I believe they will in the future. I feel sadness and sorrow for all of the victims. Jesus must be shaking his head.......

Catholics should start writing to their bishops and Most Rev. Archbishop Pietro Sambi, Apostolic Nuncio to the United States 3339 Massachusetts Ave. N.W. Washinton D.C.20008-3787 and to Pope Benedict to let them know how much we care. Say that laity must have complaint hearings with other laity present. Laity must be in committies in the assignment of priests and in all finance committies and there should be no vows of secrecy and obedience that could interfere with personal conscience and administration of justice. Normal healthy policies of business and confidentiality are enough for Church Administration.

Amen Jay and Maureen!

POPE'S INSPIRED LETTER: I just finished reading Pope Benedict's letter to the people of Ireland on the clerical sex abuse horror inflicted upon that great nation. After reading it in fear and trepidation, I came away in awe of this "inspired letter." Before criticizing the Pope, we owe it to ourselves to read the WHOLE letter with an OPEN heart. After reading it myself, I was breathless. This letter comes from the heart of a great Pope and written in his own blood.

This letter could have been worse. It could include the usual Bernard Law, "The press is to blame," or attacks on "greedy lawyers." Nonetheless, it is yet another disappointment. Even with an investigation, which could take years, there is no immediate removal of offending bishops who enabled and covered up these crimes. This letter is too little, too late.

Steve

"At the level of policy, perhaps the biggest news from the letter is that Benedict announced an "apostolic visitation," essentially a Vatican-sponsored investigation, of certain dioceses in Ireland, as well as seminaries and religious orders."

I suppose the people of Ireland will be asked to fund this too?

I'll give the letter a "C." I think the pope communicates his personal sorrow, and suggests some specific forthcoming steps, but there needs to be more specifics and an indication of what, if any, actions will be taken against the pedophile empowering bishops (world-wide).

In the late 1990's I sat in a discussion group with Cardinal Law when the Boston Globe laid out the horror story of Fr. Porter and others of his ilk. The Cardinal listened. Some of it must have been tough to hear. People were already asking him to resign. At the end, he spoke briefly, and told us that he "got it." I came away believing good things were about to happen. Weeks passed. Nothing happened. Then a lawyer for the victims came on local TV and read from the Cardinal's records, even his own correspondence, which proved his involvement beyond any reasonable doubt. I think now that the Cardinal was employing the ancient technique of "waiting it out." Time is always on the church's side, and nothing reinforces the beliefs of the pious like facts that challenge their belief system. I hope that's not the Roman plan too.

By the way, when the Boston Globe called out Fr. Porter for his sins, Cardinal Law called down the "power of Heaven" on the Boston Globe. Cardinal Law was "run out" of Boston. The Globe won a Pulitzer. You have to be very careful when you call down the "power of Heaven." Heaven will always do the right thing, regardless of who you are.

I had the same reaction to the picture alongside this article as a previous writer, Jay Carrigan had. That was not a handshake. It reminded me of the "royal" handshake of Queen Elizabeth...an attitude of "noblesse oblige". But that picture speaks a "thousand words".
"I am truly sorry" spoken by the Pope is only a first step. He needs to take responsibility for his part on behalf of the institutional church. The Pope's suggested to partake of the sacraments of penance and eucharistic adoration. No one particicpated in Eucharistic adoration more than Pope Paul II and it didn't seem to move him to do the right thing as it related to clerical sexual abuse. The next big step that I am waiting for is a confession to all the victims of the failure of both Pope Benedict 16 and the previous Pope John Paul II to act on behalf of all those who were sexually abused. Some exchange similar to what Bishop Desmond Tutu structured.
I am equally sad but not surprised that the Pope will not touch the issue of celibacy. I think Hans Kung made a plausible argument on the correlation between celibacy and clerical sexual abuse.

When will we have a "visitation" of the Vatican for its part in this crisis? When will we have reform that gives the laity a voice in their church?

I really am disappointed. Neiher the role of celibacy nor the role of power is addressed. On the latter, Benedict only wrote about "a tendency in society to favourize clergy and other authorities" (I translated back from a German translation). As if we, the lay people, were guilty for the clergy'a arrogance of power!

A little history lesson for Benedict about canon law, as he states "It cannot be denied that some of you and your predecessors failed, at times grievously, to apply the long-established norms of canon law to the crime of child abuse."

I am aghast at the distortions in that statement, since canon law norms applied worldwide were themselves an impediment to justice throughout the church. The experience of US bishops in that regard is instructive for what bishops everywhere faced.

Beginning in the fall of 1989 American bishops begged for canon law reforms to allow them more latitude in removing abusive priests.

Representatives sent to negotiate with the Vatican returned empty-handed, with the ridiculous non-sequitur that since the streamlining of canon law processes had resulted in numerous marriage annulments, similar streamlining for accused molesters “could be a threat to their rights.” (p. 130,Vows of Silence by Jason Berry)

No response was available beyond cumbersome secret trials lasting perhaps up to ten years, and that constituted impediments in civil case discovery. Bishops were also aware of their ineffectiveness. Read where priests like Anthony Cipolla and Robert Trupia appealed to Rome, and despite compelling evidence to the contrary, had their suspensions revoked. It took years of follow-up to get these molesters removed.

Again in 1993, a delegation of American bishops unsuccessfully pleaded for reforms. JPII personally denied them greater autonomy under canon law.”You’ll get no quick fixes out of me,” he told them (p. 93).

Finally by 1994, after ignoring abuse victims, JPII allowed two changes: the statute of limitations was extended from five to ten years after the victim turned 18, and the age of minority was extended from 16 to under 18. (Never mind that an average age of survivors reporting abuse has been the mid-40’s at the earliest.)

In 1995, the church’s highest court modified canon 1044 on “psychic defect” to include a sane priest with a “general mental disorder.” IOW, at least you did not have to be judged insane to be removed.

In 1997, the pronuncio was peppering US bishops with questions about diocesan policies and procedures that could be “canonically null.”

Fast forward to Dallas, 2002 after survivor lawsuits, the courts and the media brought episcopal negligence to the fore. Under guidance by the PR firm of R.F. Binder, bishops went into major damage control with the Dallas Charter and Essential Norms.

By 2002-2003, JPII allowed the CDF to waive “prescription” in individual cases, the canonical equivalent of statutes of limitation. The CDF could henceforth handle abuse cases using an administrative or non-judicial process.

THAT'S THE HISTORY OF THE VATICAN'S OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, but the papal letter makes no reference to Rome's own culpability. Blame everyone else first.

The only way this trust issue will be resolved is Faithful catholics (the people in the pew) DEMAND, DEMAND, DEMAND that the resignation of the Pope and a complete cleansing of Bishops who facilitated this entire process.

I think the Pastoral Letter is a small, but significant, step in the right direction. Those who have read Papal correspondence over the years will recognize in this Letter a tone that will not be mistaken by its recipients, at least some of whom I would expect to resign in the days ahead.

I also think this is an opportunity for Pope Benedict to consider suspending the Apostolic Visitation of Women Religious until this far more urgent, and infinitely more necessary, Visitation is completed. Unfortunately, although I support a revision of clerical celibacy, the incidence of child abuse by non-clerics is even higher than among Catholic priests, and points more clearly to a lack of screening in the 50s and 60s than to a case for married clergy.

I believe this is a systemic problem. The system under which we currently operate (both in feudal government and priestly formation) has outlived its usefulness and is now not only NOT serving the Gospel, but is actively hindering it.

Sadly, our hierarchy are not competent to investigate themselves; we will need to find suitably qualified people from among the laity to do that.

If Benedict means what he writes, then documents should be flowing out of chanceries, but I doubt it. The pastoral letter says,

"Besides fully implementing the norms of canon law in addressing cases of child abuse, continue to cooperate with the civil authorities in their area of competence."

So, will the Holy See finally respond to a request for documents about abuse charges requested by Ireland's Murphy Commission? It has stonewalled to date.

Will Bishop Lori in the US be turning over the 12% of documents he refuses right now to release under court order in Bridgeport, CT?

Will the Vatican stop objections to mandatory reporting to civil authorities in Ireland, which is the reason the Irish bishops' Framework document for handling abuse allegations has not yet received a Vatican recognitio for its policy?

As the Murphy Report notes: “The (Vatican) congregation indicated that “the text contains procedures and dispositions which are contrary to canonical discipline. In particular ‘mandatory reporting’ gives rise to serious reservations of both a moral and canonical nature”.

Don't hold your breath. Or does Benedict's instruction apply to all bishops except himself?

The Pope's letter to Ireland is neither inspired or anything new. He still does not get it and I am afraid he never will. He really needs to resign but he will not. He will continue in the denial process which has paralyzed the Church for decades. More of the same will not do. The Church continues to unravel at a rapid pace. The Holy Spirit has been telling us this model of Church is not working but the hierarchy, ever concerned to keep living a life style of kings, becomes ever more entrenched in protecting their turf as the Church implodes from its' own corruption. This letter from Ratzinger does nothing. It is hollow.

I agree that the letter is too little, too late to prevent more crimes against innocent children. Guilt requires penance. True reform of the system is necessary; namely, eliminate forced celibacy, require obedience to civil law, recognize equality of women, and last but not least, remove absolute power of any one bishop. Also, the Vatican should give an open statement that, contrary to prior claims, homosexuality has nothing to do with pedaphilia. Here is a suggestion: instead of investigating the sisters, let the sisters do the investigations of the priests and bishops who covered up the crimes.

Sister Turlish is wrong when she says that:
"No rules and no laws of any religious organization or denomination should be allowed to trump the laws of a civilized society where the protection of children is concerned."

It should instead read:
"No rules and no laws of any religious organization or denomination should be allowed to trump ANY LAWS OF ANY SOCIETY OR RELIGOUS BODY where the protection of children is concerned."

Sexual abuse is only one kind of abuse. "Civilized society" means different things to different people. Just ask someone in the Middle East where children have little or no rights and often 'family honor' comes first.

Jesus interrupted his preaching to place a priority on a child. Let us pray for all children.

I know that in the long run, this is a 'felix culpa.' It will help purify the church.

Blah, blah, he thinks that acknowledging the abuse and apologizing he will save clericalism. It seems he can't punish or remove bishops for crimes when he himself looked the other way when Archbishop of Munich and then at CDF. As we speak hundreds are pouring over thousands of documents in Germany. It's only a matter of time for the santa claus pope, and he knows it.