Torture the Little Children? The Catholic Church Says It’s Not Responsible

At a United Nations hearing the Vatican tries to turn the moral question of whether child abuse is torture into a legal debate about jurisdictions.

 

By Barbie Latza Nadeau

This may come as a huge surprise to many Catholics, but the Holy See is claiming it doesn’t really bear legal responsibility for how they or even their priests behave. Too good to be true? Actually, too horrible to be believed. What the Vatican is claiming this week before a United Nations panel is that, really, the question of priests sexually abusing little kids is a matter for local law enforcement. And, no, the physical pain and mental anguish inflicted on children by pedophile prelates should not be called “torture,” at least as defined by the U.N.pedophile priest rape sexual abuse catholic church headline scandal priest hypocrisy political cartoon

When the Vatican’s U.N. ambassador appeared in front of the U.N.’s Convention Against Torture in Geneva on Monday, the issues were about jurisdiction, not spiritual guidance and the Roman Catholic Church’s moral responsibility for errant clerics. “It should be stressed, particularly in light of much confusion, that the Holy See has no jurisdiction over every member of the Catholic Church,” said Archbishop Silvano Tomasi, who represented the Vatican as a signatory of the convention on torture.

In his opening remarks, released in advance to the press, Tomasi went on to say, “The Holy See wishes to reiterate that the persons who live in a particular country are under the jurisdiction of the legitimate authorities of that country and are thus subject to the domestic law and the consequences contained therein. State authorities are obligated to protect, and when necessary, prosecute persons under their jurisdiction.”

“Not our problem” and “they don’t work for us” may have become the boilerplate answers on the issue of who is ultimately responsible for priestly child abuse. But, curiously, when it comes to nearly every other subject, from doctrinal issues like preaching against birth control and for sexual abstinence, to how those spreading the Catholic message behave, including nuns “pushing feminist themes,” the Catholic Church at least seems to want total jurisdiction over its flocks and its shepherds.

As for those state authorities the Vatican says are “obligated to protect,” the Vatican hierarchy has, for years, done everything it can to prohibit them from doing just that by refusing to turn over documents on pedophile priests, or, in some cases, threatening the victims who dare to speak.

In an open letter ahead of Monday’s meeting in Geneva, Barbara Blaine, head of the Survivors Network of Those Abused By Priests, known as SNAP, asked the U.N. committee members to remember that the Vatican is still covering up sex abuse.

In Rome, the pope’s spokesman, Father Federico Lombardi, shrugged off the meeting entirely, telling reporters that the topic of child abuse has no place in a discussion of torture.
“First, we humbly ask that you keep in mind that we are convinced that hundreds of innocent children and vulnerable adults are being sexually violated, tortured and assaulted—right now, today—by Catholic clerics,” Blaine wrote. “Second, we ask that you keep in mind that torture and violence can be subtle and manipulative. Or it can be blatant and brutal. Either way, it’s horribly destructive to the human spirit, especially when inflicted on the young by the powerful, on the truly devout by the allegedly holy.”

The Vatican’s required appearance in front of the Convention on Torture is the second time this year it has been called on the carpet for how Rome guides the Church’s many dioceses across the world. In January, Vatican officials also sat in front of the United Nations’ Convention for the Rights of the Child to defend their inexcusable record on child abuse. Then, the U.N. group scolded the Vatican:

“The Committee is gravely concerned that the Holy See has not acknowledged the extent of the crimes committed, has not taken the necessary measures to address cases of child sexual abuse and protect children, and has adopted policies and practices which have led to the continuation of the abuse by and the impunity of the perpetrators,” that U.N. panel concluded.

Back then, as on Monday, Tomasi toed the party line, pleading that the Church in Rome could not possibly take responsibility for what its priests do in the field. “Priests are not functionaries of the Vatican,” Tomasi told the committee in January. “Priests are citizens of their own states, and they fall under the jurisdiction of their own country.”

This time, the Vatican envoy went one step further, arguing that since the Convention on Torture document only applies in a juridical sense to the confines of the tiny Vatican city-state, the members of the convention might consider what a great job the Vatican actually does getting the anti-torture message out around the world.

“It might be said that the measures employed by the Holy See to take effective legislative, administrative, judicial or other measures to prevent and to prohibit torture and to address its root causes to avoid future acts in this area are abundant,” Tomasi said. “This manifests the Holy See’s desire to lend its moral support and collaboration to the international community, so as to contribute to the elimination of recourse to torture, which is inadmissible and inhuman.”

In Rome, the pope’s spokesman, Father Federico Lombardi, shrugged off the meeting entirely, telling reporters that the topic of child abuse has no place in a discussion of torture.

“A contributory factor is often the pressure exercised over the [U.N.] committees and public opinion by [nongovernmental organizations] with a strong ideological character and orientation, to bring the issue of the sexual abuse of minors into the discussion on torture, a matter which relates instead to the Convention on the rights of the child,” Father Lombardi said. “The extent to which this is instrumental and forced is clear to any unbiased observer.”

Monday’s meeting follows the first official meeting of Pope Francis’s special commission on child abuse, whose members gathered over the weekend in Rome. They set out their initial plan for drawing up statutes and arranged to meet again soon to help define just what they will do.

“In time, we will propose initiatives to encourage local responsibility around the world and the mutual sharing of ‘best practices’ for the protection of all minors, including programs for training, education, formation, and responses to abuse,” they said in a statement after the inaugural meeting.

On Tuesday, Tomasi faces further questioning on the Vatican’s stance on abuse. If the committee does rule that pedophiliac child abuse is torture, and that the Vatican is responsible, one might expect a rush of lawsuits citing the United Nations’ ruling, or even sanctions or expulsion from the committee.

For the victims of priestly abuse, even that won’t be enough. “For most of us, enduring the torture, rape and sexual violence was almost unbearable,” Blaine said ahead of Monday’s meeting. “But the betrayal by Church officials was just as damaging and, for many, even worse than that of the sexual violence. Those in positions of trust—who we were taught were closest to God and revered above anyone else, including respected teachers, community leaders, politicians, physicians and even our parents—treat us as enemies when we muster enough courage to report the rape and sexual violence we have endured.

“Rather than being embraced, appreciated and acknowledged, we are ostracized, ignored and blamed,” said Blaine. “This adds additional torture to far too many.”

Complete Article HERE!

Vatican lifts sanctions on silenced Irish priest

As someone who was silenced by the Vatican, back in 1981, this is joyous news. The Vatican Spring come way too late for me, but better late than never. Hurray for you Sean!

 

by Patsy McGarry

Pope Francis is believed to have intervened directly with the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) to have all sanctions on silenced Irish priest Fr Sean Fagan (86) lifted.

It was confirmed to The Irish Times in Rome last night that Marist priest Fr Fagan, who has been subject to sanction by the Vatican for six years, is no longer so.

Father-Sean-Fagen

The superior general of the Marist congregation in Rome, Fr John Hannan, said last night that Fr Fagan is now “a priest in good standing” where the church is concerned.

The Catholic bishops of Northern Ireland, including Cardinal Seán Brady, have written to the North’s Assembly members urging them to reject a Sinn Féin motion calling for the legalisation of gay marriage. Photograph: David Sleator Catholic bishops urge rejection of Sinn Féin Stormont motion on same-sex marriage

It has also emerged that the change in Fr Fagan’s circumstances may have involved direct intervention by both Pope Francis and the former President of Ireland Mary McAleese.

The Irish Times has learned that Mrs McAleese, who is away from Rome at the moment, wrote to Pope Francis last December requesting that he directly intervene where Fr Fagan’s case was concerned. Receipt of the letter was acknowledged by the Pope’s secretary. It is understood that the Marist congregation was informed of Fr Fagan’s changed situation at Easter.

Others understood to have been approached to intervene with the Vatican on Fr Fagan’s behalf include his own congregation, the Archbishop of Dublin Diarmuid Martin, the papal nuncio Archbishop Charles Brown and the former head of the Dominicans Fr Timothy Radcliffe.

For many years Fr Fagan, who has suffered ill health for some time, had been critical of rigid stances by the Vatican on issues to do with conscience and sexual morality notably in letters to this newspaper. In 2003 he published the book Does Morality Change? And in 2008 Whatever Happened to Sin?

In 2010 he was informed by the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith that he would be laicised should be write for publication any material it considered contrary to Church teaching and should he disclose this to media.

Remaining copies of his book were bought up by the Marist congregation whose website last night still carried a statement first posted in February of last year which reads that “ the writings of Fr. Sean Fagan in the book What Happened to Sin do not have the approval of or represent the views of the Society of Mary.

It was reported at the weekend that the CDF’s change of stance towards Fr Fagan was because “he loves the Church in spite of all its weaknesses: that he accepted his censure and observed his restrictions; and to his advanced age.”

Welcoming the news the Association of Catholic Priests (ACP) said in a statement yesterday that “it has been a source of great unease to our members and of continuing shame and embarrassment to our Church that a priest and theologian who has made such a huge contribution to Gospel and to Church over very many years would not be regarded as a priest ‘in good standing’.”

It said that “statements welcoming the lifting of restrictions on Fr Fagan by the Marist Order, the CDF and the Irish Catholic bishops are the least that might be expected.”

It also noted “that the decision of the CDF, according to reports, was influenced by pressure brought to bear through the efforts of friends.” It believed “that a concerted effort by the orders and congregations, supported by the Irish bishops, could lead to the lifting of similar restrictions on other members of the ACP colleagues of Fr Fagan, and from the Marist congregation.”

This was a reference to those other priests silenced by the Vatican, including Fr Tony Flannnery, Fr Gerard Moloney, Fr Brian D’Arcy, and Fr Owen O’Sullivan.

Complete Article HERE!

Child sex abuse royal commission: Cardinal George Pell gives testimony in Sydney

BY THOMAS ORITI

Australia’s most senior Catholic cleric, Cardinal George Pell, has told an inquiry into child sexual abuse he should have exercised greater oversight in the case of a victim who sued the Church.

Cardinal PellThe hearing room at the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse in Sydney is packed to capacity as Cardinal Pell gives his highly anticipated testimony.

It comes after two weeks of evidence from Catholic Church officials who have recalled their involvement in the case of John Ellis, who was abused by Sydney priest Father Aidan Duggan in the 1970s.

There are conflicting accounts of what Cardinal Pell, the former archbishop of Sydney, knew about the case when Mr Ellis sued the Church.

Mr Ellis lost his case in 2007, when the New South Wales Court of Appeal ruled the Church was not a legal entity that could be sued – the so-called Ellis defence.

Last week Cardinal Pell’s private secretary, Dr Michael Casey, told the commission the Church’s vigorous cross-examination of Mr Ellis during the litigation process was wrong.

Dr Casey last Thursday faced hours of intense questioning about the Church’s handling of Mr Ellis’s claim during which he said Cardinal Pell had directed the legal team to be aggressive in its cross-examination.

The commission has also been told Cardinal Pell took months to stop pursuing court costs.

In a statement tendered to the royal commission this morning, Cardinal Pell says the “legal battle was hard fought, perhaps too well fought by our legal representatives”.

“I would now say, looking back, that these legal measures, although effective, were disproportionate to the objective and to the psychological state of Mr Ellis as I now better understand it,” the statement read.

“I realise I should have exercised more regular and stringent oversight through my chancellor(s).”

Pell denies involvement in compensation discussions

Cardinal Pell has told the inquiry he was not involved in discussions about compensation for Mr Ellis.

The Cardinal has denied claims from former chancellor of the Sydney Archdiocese, Monsignor Brian Rayner, that he was involved in discussions about money.

Counsel Assisting the Commission, Gail Furness, put to Cardinal Pell that Monsignor Rayner “received information from you in relation to the offers he made in respect of Mr Ellis’s complaint”.

He told the hearing he was aware of the allegations, but that they were incorrect.

“I certainly did not participate in any extended discussion on this matter,” he told the hearing.

“I certainly did not nominate any amount of money. There’s a whole lot of things wrong with that account. There was no cap.”

Cardinal Pell also denied claims he rejected a compensation request when Mr Ellis lost his job.

“That I would agree to offer him $5,000 extra by way of compensation, I regard as grotesque,” he said.

There was a round of applause in the hearing room when Cardinal Pell was challenged to back up a claim.

“You’ve said that in quite a number of cases, for example, in schools, the incidents are found not to be validated,” Ms Furness told Cardinal Pell.

“I call for the data that supports that evidence.”

Vatican gave accused ‘benefit of the doubt’

Before turning to the Ellis case, the commission questioned Cardinal Pell about the culture of the Church in the 1990s.

Cardinal Pell agreed that before the Towards Healing pastoral and redress scheme was established in the mid-1990s, some priests were moved between dioceses in the event of an abuse complaint.

“Unfortunately that was the case,” he said. If that happened, it would be very much by way of exception.”

He told the hearing the Holy See took a sceptical approach to complaints of abuse and the accused were given “the benefit of the doubt”.

“The attitude of some people at the Vatican was that if accusations were being made against priests, they were made exclusively or at least predominantly by enemies of the Church to make trouble and therefore they should be dealt with sceptically,” he said.

“I think there was more of an inclination to give the benefit of the doubt to the defendant rather than listen seriously to the complaints.”

Cardinal Pell also told the commission that sentiments similar to those in the Vatican were present among some in the Australian arm of the Church in the early 1990s.

“Not to anything like the same degree, I don’t think, but it is a little bit difficult to know what people think on these issues unless they are discussed directly or they are challenged on them,” Cardinal Pell said.

“I never heard – I think in many ways, the English-speaking world made a significant contribution to the universal church in this area.

“In dealing adequately with this, whatever the deficiencies, I think we were ahead of some countries.”

He said when he became Archbishop of Melbourne he “moved very vigorously no improve what was a chaotic situation” surrounding the handling of abuse claims.

Abuse survivors listen closely to Pell’s evidence

The walls outside the royal commission have been covered in placards from victim support groups, calling on Cardinal Pell to be accountable for his actions and detail his role in the Ellis legal proceedings.

Child abuse survivors said they would watch Cardinal Pell’s appearance with great interest.

Dr Cathy Kezelman, the president of the group Adults Surviving Child Abuse, said there needed to be some clarity around the issue.

“We’re all waiting to see what the archbishop’s role was in this case and there’s been conflicting evidence to date. What we know is that John Ellis suffered enormously through this,” she said.

“We had an internal church process that acknowledged he’d been abused and yet when he sought a civil claim that was brought into question.”

Care Leavers Australia Network chief executive Leonie Sheedy said her organisation was eagerly anticipating the Cardinal’s evidence.

“It’s so long overdue,” she said. “I feel so sad about what happened to John Ellis and all those other people who have tried to get justice for the crimes that were committed against them.

“They call it the Ellis defence, but it should be called the Pell defence.

“He’s going to go down in history as the person who denied people justice.”

After his testimony, Cardinal Pell is expected to leave Australia for Rome to take on a new senior role at the Vatican, which includes responsibility for preparing the Vatican’s annual budget, as well as financial planning and enhanced internal controls.

The hearing continues.

Complete Article HERE!

Priest in Pike County sex case promoted after move to Paraguay

By Beth Brelje

A Roman Catholic priest who was accused of molesting boys in Shohola and Moscow, Pa., has been promoted to the No. 2 position in his diocese in Paraguay.

That is according to a database released this week, listing Catholic clergy from Argentina involved in sex abuse cases. The database was compiled by BishopAccountability.org, an organization that aims to keep a record of sex abuse in the Catholic Church.escudo_livieres_color

Former Bishop Joseph Martino of the Diocese of Scranton allowed the Rev. Carlos Urrutigoity to transfer to a parish in the South American country of Paraguay after multiple witness statements in several court cases claimed that Urrutigoity routinely slept in bed with and had sex with boys in his care, calling it spiritual guidance.

Currently, Urrutigoity is vicar general of the Ciudad del Este diocese in Paraguay. That makes him the second in command, just under the bishop there. Part of his job is to investigate any claim of sexual abuse that might come to the diocese.

“Now he is in a position of power. I’m concerned for the children of Paraguay. From everything I’ve learned, Father Carlos has not stopped. This is a basic child protection issue,” said Patrick Wall, a former priest who is now a Minnesota-based advocate for victims of sexual abuse by clergy.

Between 1950 and the present, 6,193 Roman Catholic priests have sexually assaulted children, according to Wall.

“In my experience, if you allow a guy who has sexual proclivity for children to go unchecked, he will abuse several hundred children in his professional life as a priest,” Wall said.

Allegations of local abuse

A 2002 federal lawsuit was brought in the Middle District of Pennsylvania by “John Doe,” a student at St. Gregory’s Academy in Moscow, against Urrutigoity, the Rev. Eric Ensey, and then-Bishop James Timlin of the Diocese of Scranton.

The suit alleged that Urrutigoity and Ensey offered “spiritual direction” to the student by sleeping with him and that both priests sexually assaulted him at Saint Gregory’s Academy and at a Shohola property that was supposed to be developed into a Catholic college and village for the Society of Saint John, founded by Urrutigoity. The society was focused on celebrating Mass in Latin.

S.E.R. Mons Rogelio Livieres PlanoTestimony in the 2002 case brought at least three similar claims of bed-sharing and sexual advances to light.

In 2002, Timlin suspended Urrutigoity and Ensey from their ministries and sent them to Southdown Institute in Canada for psychological evaluations.

Southdown specializes in treating clergy who have sexual boundary problems.

Minutes from a March 2002 Diocese of Scranton independent review board summarize evaluations by Southdown Institute:

The institute “strongly recommended that (Ensey) undergo residential treatment to address severe anxiety and depression” that was the result of repressed sexuality. The evaluation said Ensey’s sexual attraction toward adolescent boys is “a stage he appears to be locked into.”

And it recommended Ensey “be strictly prohibited from any public ministry of any kind; he should have no contact with any young person.”

The evaluation of Urrutigoity said: “In view of the credible allegation from the seminarian (John Doe), his admitted practice of sleeping with boys and young men and the troubling evaluation by the Southdown Institute, Father Carlos Urrutigoity should be removed from active ministry; his faculties should be revoked; he should be asked to live privately.”

Despite these recommendations, their priesthoods did not end.

The Scranton diocese settled the John Doe case in 2006, reportedly for more than $400,000.

Due to the sex scandal and funding issues, plans for the college and village on the Shohola property were abandoned by the diocese and the land was sold to a private party.

Timlin retired as bishop in 2003.

In 2004, Martino became bishop. He allowed Urrutigoity to transfer to Paraguay, where he was promoted to monsignor as of 2012.

As of February 2014, Urrutigoity was promoted to vicar general.

“This is a grand example of a worldwide policy that a priest can sexually abuse kids in another country and go somewhere else and become vicar general of the diocese,” Wall said, adding that Bishop Plano, Urrutigoity’s superior, should report him to the police and kick him out of the priesthood.

“This is not a God issue, this is a problem with people who pretend to believe in God who are involved in criminal conduct,” Wall said.

Complete Article HERE!

Catholic church will name 50+ priests who abused 100s of children in state

By Mike Dennison

Most of the 362 sex-abuse victims who sued the Catholic church of western Montana, saying they were abused years ago by priests and nuns, will get monetary damages from a settlement with the church.

Bishop George Leo ThomasBut they’ll see something else they consider vitally important, their lawyers say: Public identification of their abusers.

“They wanted their abusers to be publicly identified and for the Diocese to accept responsibility,” says Tim Kosnoff, a Seattle attorney who co-represents 271 of the plaintiffs in two lawsuits. “By that aspect, I think we’ve succeeded.”

Kosnoff and other attorneys who worked on the cases say more than 50 Roman Catholic priests will be named as sexual abusers of children.

Once the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Butte approves the settlement, the names of the abusers will be posted on the Roman Catholic Diocese of Helena’s website.

Most, if not all, of these priests are dead, attorneys for the plaintiffs say. The bulk of the abuse occurred from the 1940s through the 1970s, although some happened as far back as the 1930s.

The oldest victims are in their 80s; the youngest are in their 40s.

The settlement, if approved, also may include documents that discuss the knowledge of Diocese officials who knew or may have known about the abuse, plaintiffs’ attorneys say. However, these officials won’t be held personally liable.

David Clohessy, director of the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, has criticized such settlements for not doing more to identify responsible church officials, saying the “enablers” should be exposed.

Still, it’s no secret who led the Helena Diocese when the abuses occurred: Bishop Joseph Gilmore, who served from 1936 until his death in 1962, Raymond Hunthausen, the bishop from 1962-1975, and Elden Curtiss, who was bishop from 1976-1993.

Hunthausen lives in a Helena nursing home and Curtiss is a retired archbishop of Omaha, Neb.

The victims filed two lawsuits in 2011 in state District Court in Helena, against the Roman Catholic Diocese of Helena and the Ursuline Sisters of the Western Province, whose nuns ran a school in St. Ignatius. The suits said nuns at the Ursuline Academy and priests in 23 western Montana counties groomed and then abused children in their care, and that the church shielded the offenders or should have known about them.

On Jan. 31, the Diocese of Helena filed for bankruptcy protection, as part of a proposed settlement with the plaintiffs.

The settlement says the church will pay $15 million to the victims and set aside at least another $2.5 million for victims who come forward later.

The agreement also calls for identification of those “credibly accused” of abusing children.

George Thomas, bishop of the Diocese of Helena since 2004, said in a recent interview that a church review board will look at abuse claims, but that he doesn’t expect the church to quibble over the naming of abusers.

“I give the benefit of the doubt to the accuser,” he said. “The one thing I want to punctuate is that I have been committed from the beginning to transparency. There are no names that I will hold in secret.

“If an accusation is made against (someone) and the facts line up, I think the public has a right to know.”

Complete Article HERE!