In
the early months of 2002, the United States of America and the world
were shocked by media reports of priestly, child sexual abuse in the
Boston diocese. This time, it was the pedophiliac activities committed
over many years by Father George Geoghan that came under the spotlight.
Investigating journalists quickly discovered that his superior, Cardinal
Bernard Law, had known of Geoghan’s depravities for many years.
His solution had been to move Geoghan from parish to parish once rumors
or complaints started. This revelation caused many other journalists
throughout the country to investigate their own locales, and what
was unearthed was headline material. So serious did the situation
become that, in an unprecedented move, Pope John Paul II ordered the
American cardinals to the Vatican for a meeting. The American faithful
waited with anticipation, and prayer, in the hope that the combined
wisdom of the Church hierarchy would at last present a firm policy
that would, if not prevent, then at least minimize, the problem.
They were to be gravely disappointed. At the televised news conference
from the Vatican, only four of the ten cardinals appeared. They were
even more disappointed to learn that the only thing to be agreed was
that the Church would not put up with child sex offenders within the
Church, and a conference would be held in Dallas the following month
to discuss how the problem would be tackled.
In Dallas, the bishops and cardinals discussed the problem for many
days, part of which was taken up by listening to the stories of some
of the victims. Some bishops were seen to have tears rolling down
their cheeks. The result of this conference was the catchphrase “Zero
Tolerance.” Everybody was delighted – until the small
print was read. As Tom Beaudoin, commented in the National Catholic
Reporter (NCR) on 2 April 2002:
Unfortunately, the bishops settled on a terribly regrettable policy.
Zero Tolerance was born of a need for image recuperation and from
an authentic attempt to reply to popular outrage. But it is a deeply
flawed and even un-Catholic policy.
Zero Tolerance is not “zero” after all. If by zero tolerance
it is meant, no abusers in the priesthood, then those found guilty
should be defrocked. But the bishops’ policy allows convicted
abusers to remain priests, though removed from active ministry. Everyday
lay Catholics will still have to support these priests directly or
indirectly for the remainder of their lives – which in some
cases may be decades.
In their rush to burnish their image in Dallas, the bishops chose
not justice, but a slogan with all the precision of a billy club.
As the author discovered in 1994 when he attempted to obtain distributors
in the Philippines for his book, People, Priests and Pedophiles, many
of the faithful, encouraged by their bishops, believed that writing
about this subject was an attack on the Church. One American bishop
was quoted as stating that there were certain people in the media
who wanted to destroy the Church. Nonsensical statements such as this
do not help anybody. Surely, one pedophile priest, his behavior known
and tolerated by his superiors, does more to destroy the Church than
one thousand writers. As reported in the National Catholic Reporter,
Bill Mitchell, a Board member of that publication, runs a website
called “Clergy Abuse Tracker.” Twice a day he searches
the world’s newspapers for any story concerning clergy abuse.
Is he attacking the Church? According to him:
In the long run, I think it will turn out that the media has done
the Church a great service on this issue by shedding light on the
secret problems that have been eroding the Church’s credibility
for too long.
The fact is that sexual misconduct has been part of the Church for
centuries. It is not a modern phenomenon, or even “an American
problem” as intimated by the Vatican. Very few Filipinos are
shocked to learn that “Father” has a regular girlfriend,
or even boyfriend. Hundreds of “mestizo” looking Filipinos
today owe their lighter-colored skin to a family liaison with a priest
at some time in the past. “Father” is only human. As long
as he is discreet about his sexual relationships and it causes no
harm, then so be it. If he is breaking his vow of celibacy, then let
it be upon his conscience alone. Perhaps Greg B. Macabenta of BusinessWorld
best expresses this laid-back attitude of the Filipino in a letter
on 22 April 2002. We do not know if he is a lawyer, but he certainly
sounds like one in this comment:
We are either more understanding of the humanness of our priests or
are more worried about the ripples that a scandal will create in the
community. In either case, we tend to look the other way and to leave
those involved to sort things out for themselves. First of all, there
is a difference between celibacy and chastity. Celibacy is a commitment
to remain unmarried. It has nothing to do with chastity. You can be
celibate all your life and still have a fling every night for a thousand
and one nights.
However, this book is not really about the breaking of the vows of
celibacy, although we quote views on this from many parts of the world.
This book is about priestly pedophiles. We use the term “pedophiles”
even though the victim may well be past puberty. Strictly speaking,
the desire for adolescents is termed epfebophilia while for pre-pubescence
it is pedophilia. They simplify their laws by stating the age at which
pedophilia ends and epfebophilia begins and ends. Countries have varying
opinions on these ages. For example, any sexual contact whatsoever
with a child under the age of 12 in the Philippines is considered
pedophilia and sentences are far more severe than for children over
that age. However, the Philippines has the age of consent at 18 years,
whereas many other countries set this at 16 years.
Pedophilia is abhorrent to any society. Certainly, pedophilia can
be a violent act. A few times every year, some country or other will
headline the abduction of a young girl or girls and the search for
and the eventual discovery of the murdered bodies. Fortunately, the
ensuing manhunt generally produces the perpetrator.
The facts are that literally scores of children all over the world
suffer some form of sexual abuse before reaching adulthood. A great
number of these abuses will never be reported even to their family,
let alone the authorities. The abuse experienced may be simple fondling
of sexual organs, oral sex or even full penetration of anus or vagina.
Usually, the abuser will be someone who, over a period of time, has
gained the trust of not only the child, but also the parents. Most
pedophiles have great patience. Although the victim may feel uneasy
at looking at pornographic pictures at first, repeating this time
and time again breaks down this uneasiness. Alcohol may also be used,
but nothing can change that deep shock when the move is finally made.
The intimate contact that, deep down, the child knows is wrong. The
abuse by a person who was trusted.
The abuse will generally occur on more than one occasion. Each time,
the child becomes more and more traumatized. The guilt has to be carried
everywhere. At the dining table with the parents, in school, even
in church. Statistics indicate that the odds for the victim becoming
a child abuser himself in adult years can be high.
So, pedophilia is horrible. It is self-sustaining in that it creates
more pedophiles. A child has been abused by someone who has worked
to gain its trust. How much more horrible then, when the abuser is
a priest. A priest, by merely donning his collar, automatically becomes
a person to be trusted. Worse, to a child he has a magic power about
him. He is above being human.
One bishop remarked to the media that the percentage of priests who
were pedophiles was no different from the rest of the world outside
of the Church. This is no defense and is not even proven. Pedophiles
outside of the Church have to work to get the trust of the victim,
but the priest is automatically given it. Is he also stating that
the priesthood contains a similar percentage of professional criminals
compared to outside the Church? Would he not have gained more credibility
had he said, “I am outraged. I will do everything in my power
to eliminate this evil from the Church.”
Instead of outrage, we hear words of sympathy – not for the
victim, but often for the priestly perpetrator. We understand this.
After all, to enter the Church one first has to attend a seminary.
As this book will reveal, a great percentage of those passing through
the seminary were fully aware of sexual aberrations within its confines.
All went on to be priests. Also, virtually every priest knows of some
other priest who is breaking his vows of celibacy, or even worse.
The bishops are appointed from the priestly ranks. They may or may
not have been among the guilty. As this book shows, unless they left
the breaking of their vows until attaining promotion, certainly some
were guilty.
The archbishops and cardinals all come from the rank of bishops, and
thus the knowledge of what is going on behind the sexual scene reaches
right through the ranks, and has done for perhaps hundreds of years.
It may be that “discretion is the better part of valor,”
or “let him who is without sin cast the first stone” but
it will become obvious to the reader that unless continual pressure
is applied to the Church hierarchy, nothing will change and the Church
will become weaker and weaker.
This organizational setup partly explains why, in the past, there
have been “secret” pay-offs and “cover-ups.”
It has become obvious that everybody, from the Pope down to the seminarian,
gives their loyalty to the Church organization rather than to the
laity. If a school headmaster, upon finding out that a teacher had
been sexually abusing the pupils, merely requested the education department
to transfer him to another school, where he knew he would continue
the abuse, then the headmaster would be fired, and rightly so. But
this is what has happened in the Church: there has only been thought
given to the erring priest, and not tomorrow’s victims. A strange
slant on Christianity.
Statistics in every country clearly indicate that a growing number
of Catholics are no longer attending Church services. Is this because
an increasing number no longer believe in Jesus Christ? Clearly, break-away
charismatic movements such as El Shaddai, which regularly attract
over one million people, some of whom travel many hours to stand in
the open air irrespective of the weather, show that people still need
God.
In the U.S.A., charismatic movements flourish, while attendance at
regular churches often drop. This, seemingly, does not bother the
Church. “One cannot argue with God,” stated Jaime Cardinal
Sin. This book is not arguing with God, but some men in the Church.
Is that not allowed?
The Church is taking too long to adjust to the realities of the 21st
century. For hundreds of years, it has been above the laws of any
country. For hundreds of years, people accepted the word of the Church
as law and without question. For hundreds of years, knowledge of the
Bible was obtained by listening to readings by the priest. That has
all gone, long ago. Today’s Catholics are generally educated
and literate. They do not question Christianity, only some of the
dogma of the Church, much of which was laid down centuries ago. Most
believe that a priest is not above the law, and should be punished,
like any other person, for offenses committed. Some even believe that
because of the severe betrayal of trust, the punishment should be
more severe than for others.
The first major scandal was in 1984. Since then, many books have revealed
priestly pedophilia in countries ranging from Australia to Canada.
From Ireland to the United States. From Europe to the Orient, (although
none in the Philippines). Much of what is written here is similar
to that included in the author’s first book on the subject,
People, Priests and Pedophiles, published in the Philippines in 1994.
Yet, in spite of this, the Vatican has done nothing but issue meaningless
statements. Why? In his book, The Rise and Decline of the Christian
Empire, by one-time Jesuit priest Dr. Ian Guthridge, the author gives
the answer. He writes that the Church demonstrates again and again
that it cannot keep abreast of the changing world. He blames the way
the Church is governed by a clique of cardinals, all hand-picked by
the Pope and who elect his successor, thereby making it impregnable
to change and ensuring that a conservative pope such as John Paul
II is succeeded by another just as reactionary.
Far from attempting to destroy the Church, books such as this are
in fact trying to save the Church. It is an attempt to get the Pope
and his cardinals to look seriously at themselves, to realize that
the Church is not the Vatican, but the millions of Christians throughout
the world. They must be made to understand that the biggest weapon
in their armory, used over the centuries, a wall of superstition and
fear of the power of the Church, is largely no longer there. The Church
is now under attack and, if it is to survive, it had better act, seriously
not with statements, but action. If proof is needed of this, they
should take note of the following report by William Lobdell in the
Los Angeles Times on 17 September 2002:
In one of the first legal attacks on the United States’ Roman
Catholic leadership, an alleged molestation victim has filed suit
claiming that bishops conspired over the past 30 years to protect
priests who sexually abused children to avoid “detection, public
disclosure and scandal.”
Some experts say the suit is an innovative legal strategy to hold
American bishops accountable for a national wave of molestation cases
involving priests that have tarnished the reputation of the Church
over the past year. Others call it a legal grandstanding ploy with
no credibility.
An attorney for the bishops’ conference called the suit “frivolous”
saying that the national association of bishops never engaged in the
kind of tactics alleged.
Irrespective of whether this case succeeds or not, it is a clear notice
to the Church that if they cannot sort out their own problems, then
civil society via the laws of the land will step in and do it for
them.
The shame is that decent churchmen are shamed by the obstinate stand
of a few as the author, and many others seek damage control. One alarmed
USA priest talked of the Church being “in the greatest damaging
upheaval since the Reformation,” as the priestly pedophilia
issue gained strength.
In October 2002, former priest, but devout columnist, Bob Garon, wrote
in his Today column, “Church dealing with offenders continuously,”
and closed, “We are in crisis!” This was in reply to a
damage control letter by the author. So, the author wrote again on
28 October 2002, after press articles praising his “most prolific
social contribution of a decade,” referring to his exposure
of the past cover-ups of Father Kiss. The author had written:
I call for more whistle blowing by older priests to protect the Church.
I knew for a decade, and so did the Pagsanjan child protection group,
so why did the pedophile protectors condone by not condemning?
This is a suicidal policy of guaranteed failure, and suicide is against
the teaching of the Church.
The letter written to Bob Garon had stated:
Your October 26 column, “Church dealing with offenders continuously,”
was damaged by the press report two days earlier that was headed,
“Vatican rejects sex abuse plan,” as USA activist against
pedophile priests, Barbara Blaine stated, “We need to put the
protection of children ahead of everything else – are you going
to protect children or worry about the reputation and careers of grown
men?” The lady has a point in USA. Your column referred to the
Philippines.
My country, Australia, has largely failed to deal “with offenders
continuously.” Firstly, it fought with cover-ups and payoffs.
I spoke to churchmen, and victims. When this was uncovered, it fought
with high paid lawyers in court. When this failed with convictions,
and prison, I again told my friends in the Catholic Weekly, who had
the ears of the bishops that confrontation was counterproductive,
and the best policy to avoid damaging publicity, and resulting fading
faith was to tell the truth that shall set us free, and plead guilty.
This secret policy is now working well in Australia. But the Philippines
has yet to learn this and a current case could be the landmark before
Christmas. My Bishops-Businessmen’s Conference for Human Development
(BBC-HD) should heed this before they waste their time with more seminars
on corporate morality while avoiding their own.
Your noble defense of the Church “in crisis” had been
echoed by justice fighter Bishop Teodoro Bacani, who writes of Church
corruption.
The convictions of a multitude of USA pedophile priests, and the jailing
of many Australian priests with its small population contrasts with
the miracle of not one Filipino priest in prison despite a four times
larger population and a 3 times greater claimed percentage of Catholics.
This fact amazed the National Catholic Reporter in USA. Is it a miracle?
Who is bothering to do the counting, and so save children? Action
is needed, not inaction.
Despite several press letters, I have had no religious help to get
convicted pedophile James Byron Tivnan in prison. This is, as many
priests have newspaper columns, and not one has followed my appeals
in one year.
|
