www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Priests abused hundreds of Irish kids, church says

Priests abused hundreds of Irish kids, church says [cnn.com]

How tragic for those children. On the same topic, what about all the victims of sexual abuse? Does it make it worse that is was a child's parish priest? What about their father/mother, step-father/mother, uncle, teacher, boy scout leader???? When do we hold all offenders who were in a position of trust accountable to the same degree? My next door neighbor is a registered sex offender. To be truthful I don't care whether he was a priest in Ireland or the step father of two beautiful girls. His sin is the same. The shame is on him. We should stop blaming the Church for these individuals. There is evil everywhere, not only in the Church is it a scandel.

The alleged sex offenders should be prosecuted, and if found guilty, should go to prison.

The Church's real scandal is that some of the hierarchy may be guilty as accomplices after the fact by trying to cover up the crimes.

If there is reasonable proof that a person assisted in a cover up of a sex offense, then he should be prosecuted as an accomplice after the fact. If found guilty, he should go to prison.

I don't care if the accomplice wears a red hat, or a white hat for that matter. All people should be treated equally before the law.

It is too easy to blame the Church, after all they recruit from the general society. What they are looking at is the tip of the iceberg. In short Ireland (no different to any other country I add) is an abusive society where women and childen are vulnerable. The church Did not manange their clergy and Religious very well that is true. However, knowledge about such people as sex offenders is very recent indeed.

The Sisters of Mercy were not established because a few Dublin ladies were bored and needed something to do. The same for the Irish Christian Brothers, as you call them. They were responding to the society in which they lived and it was abusive then, so they set out to deal with it. Only somewhere along the way the wrong people ended up on the inside and did some considerable damamage to the ones the congregation was founded to protect and support.

Child abuse and the abuse of women has been with us since Adam was a lad and is still a major issue for your society in the USA and my own here in Australia. The battle is still with us, the diference is that we know more today than we did last week on this topic. The big difference for this topc will be how we use, or do not use our new found knowledege.

I think we are passed getting very excited by such details in the media, as we have heard so much over the recent years. The mistake as I see it is to think it is an issue for the Church and not the total society of any given country and it does not just happen over there just because stats get published, it happens everywhere.

ICXC
NIKA

Lord, bring about a authentic renewal in Your Church!

We have to be careful about statistics. Even though even one abuse case is tragic, we have to put the stats into perspective.

The cases reported are from the past 66 years. Many thousands of priests have served during those 66 years, many are no longer living. Does the reported 3.5 percent of priest abusers refer to all priests during this time or is the implication that 3.5 percent of the presently living priests in Ireland are abusers?

Even granted that some cases may not have been reported, at least 95 percent of priests have not engaged in this particular sin.

The other 5% belong in prison.

And don't ignore those who may be guilty as accomplices after the fact. Accomplices, if there are any, should be given the same prison sentence as the sex offender.

I'm not saying there are accomplices after the fact in any of these cases. I am just saying if there are accomplices to a crime, they belong in prison as well and are not entitled to any preferential treatment.

I do not buy the bit about so called "accomplist".
This is the way society in general dealt with the situation of sex abusers in those days and how even psychiatry recomended reponse to such cases. That being, to transfer them from their location. It had nothing to do with "coverup".
This took place in schools, in police departments, businesses and almost all other walks of life.
That is NOT to excuse or condone any person involved in abuse. But to read back into a situation with the knowledge we have today and say how someone should have responded it is wrong to call them criminals.
Stephanos I

I am not saying that we should look back and say how somebody should have responded, i.e. Monday Morning Quarterbacking.

I am saying that some jurisdictions have declared that certain acts are criminal, as an accomplice after the fact, to murder, to armed robbery, to arson, to rape, to deviant sexual conduct, and to other crimes.

Everyone should be treated the same if they have committed the crime of being an accomplice after the fact. Just because a person may be a member of the hierarchy of a recognized religion does not give him or her a pass for acts violating the criminal law.

I hope and pray that nobody in the Church has committed such acts.

John That is why the Diocese and Religious Congregation/Orders are being made to pay up. The offender goes to jail but the organisation has been also taken to Court as also responsible, hence the millions being paid out all over to the victims. Sadly it has been proved in Courts that those who had authority to deal with the offenders, did not prevent further abuse at all. So it went on and on. Some offenders have been in jail now for years and they are going to be there for many more. I think the rush is now down to a trickle and hopefully there has been some learning done by the Bishops and heads of the religious communities. The figures the were leaked out in Dublin are a surprise to some, who would be forgiven in thinking thnaks to the media that the clergy were all at it, instead of a very small group.

ICXC
NIKA

Then why is there such vociferous opposition to an extension of the statute of limitations for sex crimes against minors?

If a Bishop is guilty of intentionally aiding and abetting a priest in raping a minor, then the Bishop should be prosecuted as an accomplice.

If the Vice-President of a Fortune 500 company intentionally aided and abetted a General Manager in raping a secretary, then the Vice-President would be prosecuted as an accomplice.

Equal treatment for all under the law.

Caution - a movement for priests to fight back is gathering strength in several places. It is clearly immoral (and in many places illegal) to act as though someone accused of a crime is guilty until proven innocent. At least one priest who succeeded in clearing himself of this horrific accusation is now suing his own Archdiocese for wrongful suspension and defamation of character.

Incognitus

Dear Incognitus,

That is good to hear!

What does NOT make the headlines is the numbers of priests who are routinely accused of this crime and who are automatically assumed to be guilty until proven innocent.

Even when they are shown to be innocent, the stigma of being accused in this manner in the first place often remains (I haven't done any studies of this, so I simply ask you to take my word for it on the basis of "intelligent subjectivity . . .).

Alex

As I understand it the extension is selective; it would not include, for example, public school teachers, who have the rare distinction of having a worse track record than Catholic priests, though they have not garnered the media attention. To single out the Church for this extension is an injustice.

The Church in Ireland was foundering, at least
in the cities. This should about finish it off...

-Daniel

Here's an article that I think places the whole problem of child abusing priests in perspective http://www.salon.com/mwt/feature/2002/05/22/molestation/index.html

We should never forget that those who falsely accuse are every bit as vile as those who actually abuse.

With all due respect, Lawrence, I can't agree that someone who makes a false accusation against a priest - who is, after all, an adult and theoretically able to defend himself - is "every bit as vile" as someone who rapes a child. It's bad, yes, but not THAT bad.