|
Wednesday, 23 June 2010
Survivors prevail vs. L.A. Catholic Machine
Mood:
 celebratory
Topic: Clergy Abuse
We prevailed against Mahoney and his spin machine. a record $ 660 million dollar setllement was awarded. We are still waiting, however, for the, full disclosure agreedto in the settlement. In the end , we will prevail!
Posted by springbrooke
at 8:01 PM PDT
Thursday, 13 September 2007
Slaughter of Innocence
Mood:
 on fire
Now Playing: for your children at a church near you
Topic: Clergy Abuse
WHEN KING HEROD THE GREAT learned from the Magi that they were seeking a newborn child who would become king over all, he ordered a slaughter of the innocents. Herod, then 75 years old, was not new to murderous revenges—and he would eventually kill his own grown son. Rather than risk losing his estate, he instead ragefully ordered that all of Bethlehem's precious boy babies under 2 years of age be murdered in their cradles. Pick up your Bible, and surely the very page weeps blood as you read, "A voice was heard in Ramah, wailing and loud lamentation, Rachel weeping for her children; she refused to be consoled, because they are no more" (Matt. 2:18). The anguished Rachel is awakened again today. Who here cannot hear the terrible weeping for the children of our own time? Lord, hear our prayer. Awaken us. May the slaughter of innocents never be allowed again. But today we have to do more than just pray. Let us learn the harsh facts and not turn away. Let us act, link arms across the world to better protect all children. I think I speak for many Catholics when I say we could not be one ounce more heartsick and strewn with ashes than we are right now over hearing of some priests using children for sexual gratification. Let this be our prayer, forever and always: Awaken. Be awake. Remain awake. As a psychoanalyst practicing clinically for 32 years, I am not a priest, not a theologian. But perhaps, ultimately, I am someone far more dangerous—a Latina grandmother with a fierce glint in her eye who knows several somethings about moral formation. As I see it, our first task here is to acknowledge that sexual intrusion against children exists and apparently far more often than we would ever think to imagine. Next we must apply proper spiritual and temporal remedies for every soul's recovery from this modern slaughter of the innocents. The issues require excruciating differentiation so as not to harm those who have already made their admissions and paid their debts; not to falsely accuse; not to sacrifice for the sake of the status quo or the institution any child or adult who is blameless; not to allow righteous anger at perpetrators to demean all the other priests who have lived honorably; not to allow solely legal postures to dominate this process. I hope we can look closely and be willing to hold firmly accountable those who have intruded, while also exonerating justly when appropriate. From decades in post-trauma work—both with war veterans and with victims of massacres and natural disasters—I know that the steps to help mend this tremendous laceration to the souls of many will take much time. The burden is very heavy, and the night is bitter cold, but I believe we can make it across this la noche oscura del alma, as San Juan de la Cruz called it, this "dark night of the soul." The way through this dark night can come through self-inquiry, both as individuals and as a group. We can stop the secrecy by telling the whole story by the light of day. The sacrament of Reconciliation can provide the model. In this sacramental assessment of our own motives, foibles, and oversights, we are given a way of asking that the disattached heart, mind, body, soul, and spirit be mended back together and made whole again. Whether in medicine, psychology, or theology, we know that a sickness lying underneath the skin and left without effective treatment will infect and devastate the entire body. It will eventually suppurate and rise to the surface, destroying all living tissue. This is what has apparently occurred in the matter of certain priests sexually abusing children. Medicine must be administered, and quickly. Can prayers be antibiotics? Yes. Can goodwill help? Yes. But far more is needed—a psychic surgery, excision, grafts. Where to make the cuts, what to excise? I strongly believe we should start with scanning ourselves. Unconsciously or not and in varying degrees of responsibility and culpability, we have been rampantly negligent in questioning our own naïveté about who and how others administer accountability and justice; in the need for vigilance regarding children; in our learning the true facts about mental disorders in our times; about evil being a palpable force in the modern world that can overwhelm reason and resolve; and about the proximity of children to disordered adults being the perfect feast set out for those who raven and sexually overwhelm the young. We are not alone in responsibility here. Naïveté, sluggish comprehension, and studied ignorance about how predators of many kinds easily savage those who are vulnerable infects our entire culture. Child sex slavery. Children caged in cellars. Children lured through the Internet. Food withheld as punishment. Beatings that blind and deafen children for life. Children murdered daily in heart, spirit, and body. These atrocities do not only occur in isolated wadis halfway across the world. They can and do occur right down the street, in our own villages. Pedophilia is an illness, not a job description. This disorder is found in all ethnic groups and social classes. Others who are not priests intrude on the young as well. One of the greatest helps children can be given is to be kept away from such persons. The greatest help a person suffering from this disease can be given is to isolate them from children. No honor accrues to the fox—or anyone else—by setting out little chicks in order to test whether the fox has been "adequately rehabilitated" or not. South African Archbishop Desmond M. Tutu sat day after day through the hearings of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. These broke the silence about the profound violations of the human spirit and the slaughters that had taken place during apartheid. The commission used an imperfect but greatly healing process to try to find a way—hard as it was—so that people could manage to live together again after thousands of murders and heinous mayhems. The central remedy offered by the commission was to listen to all the people's stories with the intent to help restore the greater parts of what could be restored, to heal and to forgive and/or forbear in equal parts as well. After the many stories of grave transgressions were truthfully told, the choice for peace in the future was made individual by individual, not by any authoritarian declaration to "move on." Publicly speaking truths with accountability is one of the most direct paths toward peace. To be truly heard is, for many, the exact heart of healing. Tutu's boldness in facing the truth without turning away can embolden us as well. By wearing the aegis of the God of love, the Christ Jesus, we too can proceed toward truth in the current crisis, even though with great trembling in the soul. It is premature to "move on," but it is time to move forward. So, where to start with our own accountability in this matter of sexual predation on the young by those in positions of trust? We, each according to our station in the church, can commence most clearly by giving a full and extensive apology to the victims. But an apology of a thousand "I am sorrys" is not enough to help heal those who have been harmed. Rote words alone, without the true heart being fully engaged and knowledgeable, are not part of the sacramental process of Reconciliation. We must ask God to give us the strength and vision we will need to patiently cross this rocky and cold place and to shelter the precious spirit of all children. Some, I know, would just like to say a fast "Sorry," ask forgiveness, and get it over with already. http://uscatholic.claretians.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5834&news_iv_ctrl=0&abbr=usc_
Posted by springbrooke
at 9:16 AM PDT
Updated: Friday, 7 March 2008 12:48 AM PST
Saturday, 15 October 2005
couldnt have said it better
Mood:
on fire
Topic: Clergy Abuse
The Catholic Church is at it again
By Riggs Fulmer
October 14, 2005
On Wednesday, the New York Times ran a front page article detailing the release of yet another garish laundry list of 75 years of deception, obfuscation, buggery and rape, this time in Los Angeles. Again we see a systematic cover-up of predatory sexual abuse, hidden behind semen-stained velvet curtains and sententious demands for forgiveness. It's the same sick, old story.
As I read the article I grew angrier and angrier. Many of my friends, teachers and co-workers are Catholics and are intelligent, honest people. Unlike their church "leaders," real Catholics use their faith as a base, a moral guide, a community with which to unite and celebrate the Divine. The Catholic Church as a temporal entity, on the other hand, uses its "faith" as a loophole, an abutment to crouch behind, a justification for the worst, lowest types of violence and dishonesty. To call this hypocrisy borders on euphemism. It's long past time that the Vatican live up to the ideals they promote.
Now that these acts and their concealment by Church administrators have been exposed, the same priests, bishops, and cardinals who turned a blind eye to the chronic rape of defenseless children, at the hands of those whom they should have been most able to trust, now ask us to do the same. Utterly and disgustingly unconcerned with the physical well-being of the least among their flocks over decades of sexual coercion, they now rush to guard the coffer doors when these selfsame victims rightfully demand that things be made right.
Understand that my anger is in no way directed towards Catholics, or even against Catholicism, although many of the tenets of that faith are, to me, insupportable. I'm angry with the Pope and his lackeys in the Vatican. The leaders of a religion whose deity said, quite explicitly, "It is easier for a camel (or rope, according to the Peshitta text) to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven," are living in wealth so opulent that it would make Paris Hilton blush, and their flock is supposed to accept it. After waiting almost half a century to apologize for their refusal to stand up and condemn the Holocaust, they turn around and elect an ex-Nazi as pontiff. And while AIDS and starvation move like a brush fire through the ranks of the poorest, these "celibate" aristocrats refuse to condone the use of condoms. Friends, come on now, is it really more sinful to fuck your wife while wearing a rubber than to rape little boys in a palace?
All right, I'll calm down. I have no doubt in God's capacity for infinite forgiveness, and it might surprise you, given this article, to find that I pray many times every day. However, I'd suggest that in this case, we leave the forgiveness to God, and take care of the accountability our own damn selves. There's a Sufi axiom to which we should take heed: Trust God, but tie up your camel. God gave you hands and an asshole; don't expect him to hand you the TP as well.
I'd propose two radical reforms to help alleviate this situation: allow priests to marry and allow women to be priests.
The first addresses a number of points. One huge impact would be on the role of priest as counselor in matters involving marriage and sexuality. It's ludicrous to think that a person who's been celibate for thirty years could substantively comment on such matters. But of equal importance would be the release of testosterone, and I'm not kidding here. An intense focus on sexuality while denying its release even through masturbation? Who could ever think this a healthy situation? We might as well appoint 13-year-old boys to guard the girls' locker-room showers!
And allowing women into the priesthood would not only rectify 2000 years of baseless sexism (maybe we can thank the first Letter to Timothy, 2:9-15 for that bullshit), but it would put those vastly less likely to succumb to impulses of pederasty and rape at the reins.
God is good, God is great, but her representatives at the Vatican and its subsidiaries are often neither. It's time the world's Catholics demand that their church look more to the spiritual and physical health of its congregation, and less to slavish obedience to archaic, bass-ackwards dogma or the turning of an indulgent blind eye when grotesque crimes are committed again and again.
When the Catholic Church honestly focuses on righteousness rather than self-righteousness, it will at last become the immense force for good, which has always been its potential.
Posted by springbrooke
at 9:50 PM PDT
Saturday, 14 May 2005
Take the Bishop Michael Driscoll Pedo-Quiz!
Mood:
on fire
Now Playing: Why isnt this guy in jail?
Topic: Clergy Abuse
by GUSTAVO ARELLANO (O.C.Weekly)
Driscoll
On May 6, Diocese of Boise Bishop Michael Driscoll apologized for his role in Orange County’s Roman Catholic Church sex-abuse scandal. Driscoll—who was in charge of priest personnel affairs for the Diocese of Orange from its 1976 inception until leaving for Idaho in 1999—made the stunning admission in a letter printed in the Idaho Catholic Register, stating he was “deeply sorry that the way we handled cases [in Orange County] allowed children to be victimized by permitting some priests to remain in ministry, for not disclosing their behavior to those who might be at risk, and for not monitoring their actions more closely.”
What’s with the mea culpa? Two words: damage control. On May 17, a Los Angeles Superior Court judge will issue a ruling determining which priest personnel files will become public as part of the record-breaking $100 million settlement reached earlier this year between the Orange diocese and sex-abuse victims. Church sources say Driscoll’s name is all over the documents, which molestation survivors claim will show the various cover-ups Orange diocesan officials executed while Driscoll served as chancellor and auxiliary bishop.
But why wait until May 17? Take the following quiz and discover for yourself Driscoll’s role in the rape of innocents!
1. Of the 21 priests the Orange diocese classifies as having “credible” molestation allegations, how many worked under Driscoll’s watch?
a. Half
b. Eight
c. All but one
d. 13
2. How many molestation lawsuits did the Orange diocese settle during Driscoll’s term?
a. None
b. Six
c. 30
d. Unknown
3. What famous county pedophile once testified that Driscoll asked him to stop molesting girls?
a. Gerardo Tanilong
b. John Lenihan
c. The president of the local NAMBLA chapter
d. Ted Llanos
4. After the diocese settled a 1991 lawsuit filed against John Lenihan, what disciplinary actions did Driscoll take?
a. Made Lenihan go to psychological counseling
b. Transferred him out of St. Boniface in Anaheim to another parish
c. Nothing
d. Defrocked Lenihan
5. When Siegfried Widera transferred to Orange County from the Archdiocese of Milwaukee in 1976, Milwaukee Bishop William Cousins told Driscoll that Widera once had “a moral problem with a boy.” What was the moral problem?
a. Just a mix-up, sir—the boy’s shorts accidentally fell to his ankles
b. Showed him pornography and gave him alcohol
c. Was arrested on a molestation charge
d. Told him the Freemasons and Jews kept Pope Paul VI in a Vatican basement
6. In a 1991 deposition for a civil trial against Eleuterio Ramos, Driscoll claimed he had only heard secondhand complaints about Ramos molesting boys. During that trial, who testified under oath that they went directly to Driscoll with their concerns about Ramos?
a. A priest
b. A church librarian
c. A parochial teacher
d. All of the above
7. When a parent revealed to Driscoll in the mid-1980s that Father Robert Foley had molested her boy on a Boy Scout trip, Driscoll:
a. Sent Foley to an Indian reservation as he did three other pedo-priests
b. Sent him to Liverpool, England, along with a letter to church leaders across the pond that the parent “has threatened to go to the police” and Foley “is in jeopardy of arrest and possible imprisonment if he remains here.”
c. Sent him away on vacation until things cooled down as he did Andrew Christian Andersen
d. Sent him to Tijuana as he did Ramos
8. After Boise diocesan officials found child pornography images on a priest’s computer in 2002, Driscoll:
a. Suspended the priest
b. Transferred him to a clinic
c. Sent him to Orange County
d. Upgraded his connection to DSL
Answers: 1. c, 2. d—six are known, but the Orange diocese has a habit of settling suits sub rosa, 3. b, 4. c, 5. c, 6. d, 7. b, 8. c
Posted by springbrooke
at 12:53 AM PDT
Monday, 21 February 2005
Foxes make good henhouse guards and reporters!
Mood:
 don't ask
Now Playing: Good news! less than a thousand new abuse cases this year (reported!)
Topic: Clergy Abuse
More than 1,000 people reported to civil or church authorities in 2004 that they had been sexually abused as children by Roman Catholic priests, the second-largest number of allegations for any year on record, the U.S. bishops' conference said yesterday.
During 2004, the church spent $157 million on legal settlements and other costs related to sex abuse. It received allegations against 756 priests and deacons, half of whom had previously been named in similar accusations. It temporarily removed more than 300 clergy members and permanently defrocked 148, church officials said.
Kathleen L. McChesney, head of the Catholic Church's child protection office, and Bishop William S. Skylstad present a report on sexual abuse cases. (Adele Starr -- AP)
The new statistics, which appeared in the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops' second annual report on the sexual abuse crisis in the church, showed the heavy toll that the four-year-old crisis continues to take on the church's finances, its clergy and the trust of its laity.
The figures released yesterday bring the total number of alleged victims since 1950 to 11,750, the number of accused priests to 5,148, and the church's expenses to more than $840 million. Three dioceses have declared bankruptcy.
But the 2004 figures do not fundamentally alter the patterns found last year in a major study of sexual abuse in the church from 1950 to 2002. As in the past, about 80 percent of the 1,083 victims who came forward in 2004 are male, and the majority said they were between the ages of 10 and 14 when the abuse began. Most of the alleged incidents took place in the 1960s and '70s.
Also as they have in the past, victims' advocates and church officials disagreed on how to interpret the figures. Kathleen L. McChesney, a former FBI official who is leaving this month as head of the church's Office of Child and Youth Protection, said at a news conference that 22 incidents, or 2 percent of all the allegations reported last year, were fresh cases involving abuse of minors that occurred in the previous 12 months. She hailed that as evidence that the number of new cases "is declining."
David Clohessy of St. Louis, national director of the support group Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests, told reporters outside the church's news conference that 22 fresh incidents is hardly "cause for joy." In fact, he said, it is probably just a small fraction of the true number, because last year's major study by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice found that child victims typically suffer in silence for 20 to 30 years before reporting clergy abuse.
Interpretation of the statistics was also complicated by a lack of data for 2003. That is because the John Jay study compiled statistics for each year from 1950 to 2002. Then the bishops voted to update the study annually beginning in 2004.
The peak number of allegations reported in any prior year on record was in 2001, when the abuse scandal erupted in Boston. More than 3,300 alleged victims came forward that year. In 2002, the number of allegations dropped to about 750, about the same number that was reported annually in the mid-1990s.
McChesney also said yesterday that 96 percent of the 195 U.S. dioceses were found in a second annual round of audits to be fully in compliance with the sex abuse policy, known as the Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People and adopted by the bishops in Dallas three years ago. The archdioceses of Washington and Baltimore and the dioceses of Richmond and Arlington were among those in compliance.
McChesney said the church spent $20 million in 2004 on efforts to prevent sex abuse, including police background checks on 32,073 priests and more than 750,000 lay people who work with children in Catholic schools and parishes.
Barbara Blaine of Chicago, president of the Survivors Network, said that the audits are largely irrelevant because they focus on whether each diocese has strict policies in place, rather than determining how well the policies are carried out.
"Every diocese in America last year was cited, even praised, by auditors for three examples of ineffective steps: employee codes of conduct, formal communication plans and having a point person to take incoming abuse allegations," Blaine said. "Is there one priest who molested one girl because he'd never read an employee code of conduct telling him child rape is wrong?"
Blaine and other advocates said the most effective step bishops could take would be to release the names of all priests who face credible allegations, which has been done in fewer than a dozen dioceses.
They also accuse some bishops of trying to evade the core promise in the Dallas Charter, which required permanent removal of any priest who has committed sexual abuse involving a minor. According to the report, at least 42 priests "remain in active ministry pending a preliminary investigation" of abuse charges.
McChesney acknowledged that the church has no policy on how long a preliminary investigation should take or how it should proceed. "Many victims/survivors, accused clergy, review board members, and the laity remain confused about the exact procedures that are to be followed," the report said.
The president of the U.S. bishops' conference, Bishop William S. Skylstad of Spokane, Wash., said he would not "second-guess the decisions of individual bishops" but that, in his opinion, "if there is a credible allegation of abuse, the priests [should be] immediately removed."
The figures on abuse allegations released yesterday included no breakdowns by diocese and no names of priests or victims. More than 90 percent of all U.S. dioceses voluntarily reported their abuse statistics for 2004, but 71 percent of the 158 Catholic religious orders in the country, such as Jesuits and Franciscans, provided their data.
Posted by springbrooke
at 12:04 AM PST
Sunday, 20 February 2005
Statement Regarding Bishops' Report on Diocese Surveys 2005
Mood:
on fire
Now Playing: RC Spin - Jesus would freak!
Topic: Clergy Abuse
CONTACT
David Clohessy of St. Louis MO, SNAP National Director 314 566 9790
Barbara Blaine of Chicago IL, SNAP Founder and President 312 399 4747
Janet Patterson of Conway Springs KS, SNAP Natl. Board Member 316 772 6537 cell
Peter Isely of Milwaukee WI, SNAP National Board Member 414 429 7259 cell
Mark Serrano of Leesburg VA, SNAP National Board Member 703 727 4940 cell
Friday, February 18, 2005
Part 1
Our message today is very simple.
First, prudent people will wait for proof before assuming these so-called reforms are working.
Second, much of what's being touted as reform is irrelevant or ineffective
Third, the crux of this crisis fundamentally remains unaddressed.
Before we talk specifics, take a minute and remember how all this came about.
Bishops have devised the rules of play, hired the umpires, chosen the players, and in about an hour, will declare that they're winning.
They wrote the Charter, they hired their own so-called watchdogs, they decide who gets interviewed and who gets heard.
This is crucial - prior to January 2002, each bishop was in charge of handling sex abuse in his diocese. Today, each bishop essentially still is.
Now, to our first message:
A lot of time and effort has been focused on abuse in the church in the last two years. A lot of time and effort went into the bishops' presentation you'll soon see.
There's one obvious question: Is all this making a difference?
The frank answer is: It's way too soon to tell.
The prudent answer is: We should assume, for now, it has not.
We owe it to innocent children and vulnerable adults to insist on hard evidence and solid data before determining progress is being made. Given what we now know about the complicity of bishops in the cover up, to do anything else is simply reckless.
We owe it to innocent children and vulnerable adults to remember that motion doesn't equal progress, and that activity doesn't equal change.
(The bishops themselves admit they have no idea if their efforts are effective. On the USCCB web site, in an FAQ section, it asks: Does the Charter mandate an effectiveness or quality measurement? Their answer: the Charter does not require an effectiveness or quality measurement at this time. Whatever they're doing, they are NOT measuring effectiveness.)
Our position may seem odd. Again, a lot of energy has been focused on this horrific scandal. There have been mountains of paperwork, policies, procedures and press releases.
Has this affected performance? On the whole, we will assume not. We hope Catholics will assume not. And we beg you to assume not, we beg you to be cautious
Keep in mind that it wasn't a lack of paperwork, policies, procedures and press releases that caused thousands of priests to rape and sodomize tens of thousands of kids. So it won't be paperwork, policies, procedures and press releases that solve this crisis.
How can we claim that little has changed? Because history, psychology, common sense and daily anecdotal evidence are on our side.
History is on our side. History tells us that institutions change very slowly. This is especially true of very old, rigid, secretive, hierarchical, male-dominated systems. Only the most naive would believe that decades-old, maybe centuries-old patterns could possibly be dramatically changed overnight.
Psychology is on our side. Psychology tells us people change when they experience unpleasant consequences for their behavior. Bishops tell us that on the whole, donations aren't down, mass attendance isn't down, and seminary enrollment isn't down. We've seen not a shred of evidence that bishops are fundamentally suffering or being forced to change their lifestyles or are losing their power.
Common sense is on our side. Common sense tells us that if the upper management of an organization remains essentially intact after an enormous scandal, little will change. One or two bishops have fired their hardball defense lawyers. A few bishops have fired their PR person. Some bishops have died or retired. But the stability within the upper ranks of the church is remarkable. Basically, the same men are in charge now that were in charge 3, 5, even 10 years ago. How can anyone really believe things have changed much.
Daily evidence is on our side. Every day, we hear from survivors who continue to be treated insensitively. Every day, we see bishops parsing phrases and splitting hairs and playing word games, rather than just telling the truth. Every day, we see church leaders doing the bare minimum, instead of doing what Jesus would have us to, to reach out to the lost and wounded sheep. Every day, we see Catholic officials using Catholics' donations to keep long-secret documents about cover ups hidden from public view.
(This isn't, by the way, anecdotal evidence. It's hard evidence. It's in the newspapers nearly every day. Read the Abuse Tracker. You'll see it.)
There have, of course, been many bad headlines. A few dozen dioceses and their insurers have paid settlements. A few criminals have gone to jail. In the corporate world, the non-profit world, or the government world, this scenario often produces change. But the church, remember, is a monarchy. For the most part, monarchs are unaffected by bad press, some financial losses, and a few underlings being sent to jail.
So to lay Catholics today, we say withhold judgment, don't assume, be skeptical, stay vigilant, safeguard youngsters and demand reform.
Part 2
Our second message today is that much of what's being touted as reform is irrelevant or ineffective.
Let's start with the ineffective. There have been plenty. Putting windows in confessionals is one of my personal favorites. Is a window like this bad? Of course not. Is it effective at stopping a child molester? Of course not.
Every diocese in America last year was cited, even praised, by auditors for three examples of ineffective steps: employee codes of conduct, formal communications plans, and having a "point person" to take incoming abuse allegations.
Is there one priest who molested one girl because he'd never read an employee code of conduct telling him child rape is wrong?
Is there one bishop who covered up abuse because he'd never read a formal diocesan communications plan telling him to be honest.
Is there one father who kept quiet about his son's victimization because he couldn't determine who the proper church "point person" was who handled abuse allegations?
If we pause to really consider these seemingly positive steps, many of them are revealed as largely superfluous.
Now let's look at relevancy. Much of what's being praised as reform is, in fact, largely irrelevant.
Fingerprinting employees is good. Doing background checks is good.
But 99% of the people these affect aren't part of the crisis. They aren't now and never have been. They are lay people.
The crisis involves abusive clergy and complicit bishops, not lay people.
So literally 99% of those being fingerprinted and checked have never been part of the problem.
Consider this: because molesters are shrewd, laws are archaic, statutes are rigid, prosecutors are timid, and bishops are secretive - because of all this, very few priests are criminally charged. Even fewer are prosecuted. Even fewer are found guilty.
So a tiny number of priests will ever have criminal backgrounds that a background check or fingerprinting might detect.
If these steps - fingerprinting, doing background checks, training staff - if these steps had been in place ten or 15 years ago, would they have prevented kids from being molested or bishops from covering up the crimes? In a few cases, certainly. In most cases, they would not.
We're not saying these steps are bad. We're saying the opposite. These steps are good. But they are largely irrelevant to the crisis in the church.
These steps will no doubt prevent a few molesters from becoming parochial school teachers or bus drivers. But, again, they are peripheral, not central, preventing abusive clergy and complicit bishops from causing more pain.
Look at today's AP story. This is the lead, quoted verbatim: "The Boston Archdiocese has begun running annual criminal background checks on more than 60,000 priests, employees, volunteers to prevent recurrence of the clergy sex abuse scandal."
Think about this. Again, literally 99% of those being checked are NOT clergy. So how does this "prevent recurrence of the clergy abuse scandal."
It will prevent some abuse. It will have little effect on clergy sex abuse.
Fundamentally, our beef is not with some of the measures being taken. Our beef is with how church leaders are deliberately overselling these measures. They are washing the Pinto, vacuuming the Pinto, adding a CD player and an air freshener, and saying "Viola, now it's a Cadillac."
That's wrong. That's designed not to prevent abuse, but to prevent worrying. That's designed to bring complacency, not to bring reform.
But what about the Review Board and their "big stick," this once a year report on how bishops are doing? Isn't that a deterrent to backsliding?
Let's be real. After enduring dozens of scandalous media reports about horrific abuses, is any bishop going to change his behavior because he fears a headline that says "Diocese abuse training program is only 75% finished?"
The crux of the so-called accountability mechanism -- the Review Board and the so-called "audits" - is all carrot and no stick.
Here's the bottom line:
Even the best of these steps are belated, begrudging, and too premature to be called effective at this point.
Some of these steps help, but help just a little.
Some of these steps help, but almost strictly with lay people, not with priests and bishops.
Other steps don't help, and are distractions.
They can be dangerous distractions, especially when they are depicted as substantive reforms and thus lead to premature complacency.
Do these steps take away the power of bishops? No. That's what remains to be addressed -- the power and accountability of bishops.
Part 3
Our third message today is that the crux of this crisis fundamentally remains unaddressed.
At the risk of oversimplification, here's why all these crimes and cover ups happened. In five simple words: bishops have too much power. Period. They rebuffed victims, hid secrets, transferred predators, warned no one, evaded prosecution, and decieved their flocks . . . because they could get by with it. They have too much power. That has not changed.
And today - despite the lawsuits, the bad headlines, the flurry of activity, the policies, the procedures, and the paperwork - bishops still have too much power.
Does anyone in this room really think that Cardinal Egan's power to deceive has been curtailed because the Charter tells him he must have a diocesan communications plan that pledges openness?
Does anyone really think that Cardinal Rigali's power to ignore victims has been curtailed because the Charter tells him he should be more compassionate?
Does anyone really think that Cardinal Mahony's power to hide secrets has been curtailed because the Charter talks of transparency?
Does anyone really think that Cardinal George's power to keep an admitted perpetrator in active ministry around teenagers, as he did until we exposed him last week, does anyone really think that Cardinal George's power to reassign this predator has been curtailed by the Charter's vague assurances of zero tolerance?
So if the issue is power, and power hasn't shifted, what can be done?
How, in a monarchy, can power be taken away from men who abused and continue abusing it?
There are two simple, proven ways.
The first is legislation. We don't let Enron police itself. We can't let America's bishops police themselves. And the most important legislation is reforming the archaic, rigid and dangerously restrictive statutes of limitations. When sex crimes are handled by the independent professionals in law enforcement, not by bishops, everyone is safer.
The second is getting the names of the predators. Knowledge is power, and when we gain the knowledge of who's dangerous and who's been harboring the dangerous, then we can protect our families.
We in SNAP firmly believe that this is where the focus needs to be. If real change will ever happen, it will be because bishops lose the power to handle sex crimes in house and lose the power to keep the names of molesters secret. That's where our prevention efforts have been and will continue to be focused.
Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests
www.snapnetwork.org
Sorry for the lenght but it pretty much says it all
LASURVIVOR
_________________
Bring No Harm !
Posted by springbrooke
at 12:01 AM PST
Tuesday, 13 July 2004
the RICO Petition
Mood:
on fire
Topic: Clergy Abuse
We are asking you to join thousands of other Americans and raise your voice. The Rico Campaign for Survivor Justice Petition http://www.petitiononline.com/qd3dvoo/petition.html will bring the Roman Catholic Church in the United States to accountability through a Federal RICO investigation. Please forward this information to your mailing list, colleagues, associates, family and friends.
The Rico Campaign for Survivor Justice Petition
http://www.petitiononline.com/qd3dvoo/petition.html
Press Release
"Ex-Nun Calls for Rico Investigation of Catholic Church"
http://www.prweb.com/releases/2004/6/prweb134840.htm
Thank you.
Pauline Salvucci
CONTACT:
pauline@voicesofoutrage.com
Voices of Outrage: Where's the Justice?
http://www.voicesofoutrage.com
All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing - Edmund Burke
Posted by springbrooke
at 10:51 PM PDT
Newer | Latest | Older
|
