Pope Francis – The Tragedy of Child Abuse Requires Severe Punishments

By Brian Mark Hennessey

The apparent despair of Pope Francis as he remonstrated about the sexual abuse of children in a public address in St. Peter’s Square last Sunday is not the first time that he has been very outspoken on the issue. His cry, “God weeps” during his tour of the United States in the fall of last year had resonances that dated back to his first forthright statement on the matter in 2014 – when he exclaimed that “there was no place in the Catholic Church for clerics who abused children”. On this most recent occasion he is reported as having stated – as he raised his arm in emphasis – “This is a tragedy, we must not tolerate the abuse of minors. We must defend minors and we must severely punish the abusers.” But – does Pope Francis really mean what he says – or is he window-dressing?
On this latest occasion, in which he addressed the crimes of child sexual abuse, the Pope made no mention of the Catholic Church specifically. Yet the worldwide context of his words is that the Church has had to face scandal after scandal in regard to its handling of the sexual abuse of minors by clerics and the ineffective action of diocesan clergy and the heads of Religious Orders. These failures have, of course, been to the detriment of victims of abuse who have been brushed aside by Diocesan and Religious leaders as untruthful money grabbers or bribed and subjected to oaths of silence. The range of allegations against and criticism of the Church have been legion – but include a cover up by clergy of all ranks. It has to be noted that the Cardinals of the Vatican – notably the Australian Cardinal Pell who is Prefect of the Vatican Bank and the German Cardinal Muller the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith are included in that list – and they are currently at the very top of the Vatican pile – and have influence that can retard even the progress of a Pope.
Despite the words of Pope Francis on the subject of child abuse, there appears to have been little practical gain in addressing the problem. Take for example the Pontifical Commission instituted by Pope Francis himself and dedicated specifically to the protection of minors in the Church. The profoundly sincere Boston Cardinal O’Malley, who heads up that worthy task, which is to make clergy, specifically Bishops and the Heads of Religious Orders, accountable for their failure to manage the crimes of the sexual abuse of minors and ensure that those prelates adopt due process to rid the Church of paedophile clerics, appears to have lost the ear of Pope Francis. Evidence of this is that members of the Commission have complained that the Commission is not being adequately resourced financially and that the Prefects of the Vactican Congregations are unsympathetic to a large degree – and blatantly un-cooperative or even decidedly contrary. Pope Francis has been either ineffective in, or prevented by what conspiracy theorists would call ‘powerful dark forces” from, remedying these issues.
When it comes to dealing with offending prelates of the Church found guilty of sexual abuse, or inaction rather than proactivity when faced with such crimes, there has been little strong action, which in my book, relates to being “severely punished”! Admittedly, the events that led to Catherine Devenney revealing Cardinal Keith O’Brien,’s sexual impropriety, were during the Pontificate of Benedict XVI. The revelations resulted in a series of events that included O’Brien’s suspension from and then loss of the Archpishopric of Scotland and his exclusion by Pope Benedict from the 2013 Vatican Papal Conclave in the Sistine Chapel that elected Pope Francis – and in 2014 his exceptional, enforced resignation from the College of Cardinals of the Roman Catholic Church. Yes – all that was humiliating, but Pope Francis, on taking over the reins of the Vatican, merely banned him to live a private life of prayer and penance in a comfortable, secluded Church establishment – and probably with his stipend intact. Penance and prayer is what I thought was the daily job of all clerics anyway! Not much more than a cleric’s normal daily routine has been heaped by Pope Francis on the offendending ex-Cardinal.
Moreover, (and this is right up the street of the Mirfield 12 Group of abused child seminarians) we hear in the last week or so that a Polish Archbishop, who resigned many years ago after sexually molesting Catholic seminarians, has recently been warned by the Vatican to stay away from commemorations of Poland’s Christian conversion and an upcoming visit by the Pope. Reports state that the Vatican’s Warsaw-based nuncio Archbishop Celestino Migliore has told the offending Archbishop Juliusz Paetz, formerly of Poznan, that “The Holy Father (Pope Francis) reiterates his invitation for you to live a life of privacy in repentance and prayer. Media news about your participation in official celebrations of the anniversary of Poland’s baptism has created a new situation of unnecessary and harmful commotion for the church in Poland and the Holy See. It blatantly contradicts the instructions given you.” No hint of severe punishment for a crime of abusing child seminarians there! In fact the Archbishop continued to live peacefully in his existing surroundings after the abuse was both admitted by him and he resigned. This ex-Archbishop subsequently also visited the Vatican frequently, stayed at the Vatican Curia and, indeed, met with Pope Benedict, who congratulated him for his significant contributions to the Church in Poland! (Well – I have heard child abuse described somewhat differently than that!)
Currently, the French Cardinal Philippe Barbarin of Lyon is under state judicial investigation over his mishandling (total inaction more precisely) of sexual abuse accusations against his own clergy. A group of 45 abuse survivors, La Parole Liberee, is sueing the archbishop for failing to report abuse, a crime (alas it is a crime in France but not in the United Kingdom) that risks a three-year jail term. The Group has also filed a civil lawsuit against Cardinal Gerhard Muller, prefect of the Vatican’s Congregation for Doctrine of the Faith. There appears to be no Church process in play to investigate the Cardinal – and no Vatican censure from Cardinal Muller (well how could he – being accused of the same offence!).
In summation, either Pope Francis is incincere in his continual remonstrations about clerics who commit abuse and clerics who cover it up – or is not up to the job – or employs a bunch of clerics at the Vatican who are so tainted themselves with the failures against which Francis continually expostulates that his own good intentions are systematically confounded. I suspect, indeed believe, it is the last. The Curia needs a good shake up – and Francis must get into hiring and firing mode – or he will lose both his battle – and his supportive and hopeful followers. Victims of crimes very very rarely want “revenge” – but they do need an admission of the crimes committed against them – and they are entitled to “justice. When Pope Francis talks of “severe punishment” he must be more precise and such punishment must be equitable with those punishments that the Civil States of this world – with the concensus of the populations of this world – hold to to be commensurate with the crime. I doubt if the Pope, in his sublime role, has ever heard of Gilbert and Sullivan – but he could do no better than start singing along with the Mikado and adopting as his anthem: “My object all sublime, I shall achieve in time, To let the punishment fit the crime, The punishment fit the crime”!

Brian Mark Hennessy

In reply to Mark Murray.
Hi
Not sure why I feel compelled to get in touch as i am not seeking any retribution. Just came across this site. But I thought what happened to me and my brother needs saying. I attended Roe Head in mid 70s I had just turned 12. My older brother attended too. He was the main reason I went.

My brother left and after I returned from the Easter holidays I had real bad case of homesickness. It was then that I had to go to the Father’s room at night as he tried to convince me to stay. At the time I didn’t know what was happening. He made me stand naked and used to feel my leg, working his way up to my privates and fondling them as I was told to close my eyes. There was other bits happened.
This happened a number of times before I left.

My brother however, had it a lot worse than me. He was there 3 years and had sustained abuse during that time from the same priest which went much further! I didn’t know about his experience and he didn’t know about mine until 5 years ago, a year before he died of cancer. The experience in Mirfield had a more profound effect on him who was plagued with a guilt complex all his life. As I get older I am beginning to question my long held view that it had no effect on me.

As I said I am not looking for any revenge or retribution but seeing this site I thought I better put it out there. I know my brother was aggrieved at what happened to him and it changed him forever. He would have gained a lot of comfort from this site and sharing with you all.

Update on Child Abuse Issues in the News.

Three Provincial Superiors of the Franciscan Order face the Grand Jury in Pennsyvania for conspiracy to endanger children.

Perhaps the most notable news story covered in the past week was that three Friars of the Third Order Regular Franciscans have been criminally charged in Pennsylvania with conspiracy and endangering children for their alleged role in enabling a brother in their order, believed to have sexually abused upwards of 100 minors, primarily at a Catholic high school. The report appeared in a number of press issues – including the Associated Press, the National Catholic Reporter and CNN. Brian Roewe of NCR reported that the charges were announced by Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen Kane:

Franciscan Frs. Giles Schinelli, 73, Robert D’Aversa, 69, and Anthony Criscitelli, 61, were each charged with one count of endangering the welfare of children and criminal conspiracy; each are third degree felony charges, which carry a maximum seven-year prison sentence and $15,000 fine. The three men served in succession as provincial superior from 1986-2010. The charges relate to Franciscan Br. Stephen Baker, who is accused of sexually abusing more than 100 children in the Johnstown area, including as many as 80 students at Bishop McCort Catholic High School. Baker committed suicide on Jan. 26, 2013, at age 62 — just days after Ohio news outlets reported settlements with 12 former students of John F. Kennedy High School, in Warren, Ohio, with each student saying the priest had molested them. “These men turned a blind eye to the innocent children they were trusted to protect,” Kane said.

The Grand Jury found that these individuals, when serving as Ministers Provincial and thereafter did endanger the welfare of hundreds of children by placing and/or permitting Stephen Baker to have contact with children and the public as part of his ministry”. It was the investigation into Baker in April 2014 that initiated the broader grand jury investigation into the handling of abusive priests and allegations in the Altoona-Johnstown diocese. That report, 147 pages in length and released March 1, detailed the histories of 34 alleged abusive priests and found as many as 50 priests and church officials had sexually abused hundreds of children.

Fr Schinelli, provincial from 1986-1994, learned in 1988 of an allegation against Baker, and eventually sent him for psychological examination. While testifying before the grand jury, Schinelli acknowledged that the ensuing recommendations included no one-on-one contact with children; yet he still allowed Baker in 1992 to begin working at the high school, which was not informed of any allegations.

Fr D’Versa, provincial from 1994 to 2002, failed to notify the school of allegations or offer a reason for his reassignment, or to inform local law enforcement. Still, Baker, appointed vocations director for the order, continued attending school functions, and according to alleged victims who spoke to the grand jury, continued to abuse.

In testimony to the grand jury, Criscitelli, provincial from 2002-2010, said he was told Baker wasn’t “high risk,” and that he required “safety plans” for the friar that restricted contact with minors. But the grand jury found holes in these plans, noting Criscitelli lived in Minnesota while Baker was in Pennsylvania, and that a communal system of friars mutually responsible for one another at the St. Bernadine Monastery often left alleged abusers looking out for one another. The investigation found the order had knowledge of at least eight friars, including Baker, accused of sexual abuse of children.

Calls for the French Cardinal Phillipe Barbarin to step down.

The National Catholic Reporter also carried a report this week to the effect that there have been calls demanding that Cardinal Barbarin should relinquish his role as Archbishop of Lyon, France. French Prime Minister Manuel Valls called on the prominent cardinal to “assume his responsibilities” amid widening allegations of a pedophilia cover-up targeting Lyon’s Roman Catholic diocese. In an interview with BFM TV on March 15, Valls refused himself to comment on whether Cardinal Philippe Barbarin should step down. The archbishop of Lyon, Barbarin has been accused of covering up alleged sexual abuse of young Boy Scouts by Lyon priest Bernard Preynat between 1986 and 1991 – before Barbarin was named cardinal. Last week, the Lyon prosecutors’ office announced preliminary charges against Barbarin and five other members of the diocese for “non-denunciation of a crime.” Preynat was removed from service last year after his accusers came forward. The leading French newpaper, Le Figaro, asked, “Is this the start of a ‘Spotlight’ a la Francaise?” referring to the Academy Award-winning movie now playing in France. Identified by an assumed name, “Pierre,” the accuser in the initial case – now a 42-year-old father of two – said he met Preynat during a pilgrimage to Lourdes. Prosecutors have opened a preliminary inquiry. Pierre told the newspaper he had approached Barbarin in 2009 after a doctor urged Pierre to press charges. The cardinal reportedly apologized on behalf of the priest, whom he acknowledged had a “problem,” notably earning a year’s suspended prison sentence more than a decade ago for exhibitionism. Contacted by the newspaper, the priest said he had “no memory” of the alleged incident. For his part, Barbarin has steadfastly denied any cover-up, an argument he repeated on Tuesday.”Never, never, never have I covered up any act of pedophilia,” he said at a press conference in Lourdes.

The Anglican Church cut contact with Child Abuse Victim on order of Insurers.

This week the National Secular Society published a report by Ian Elliott, an expert in child safeguarding, who has found “repeated failures” by clergy and bishops in the Church of England to deal with reports by survivors of child abuse.

A single survivor of child sex abuse told “over 40 members of the clergy during the 1970s, 80s, 90s and 2000s” of sexual abuse he had suffered at the hands of a senior member of the Church of England, but failed to receive an adequate response – including from people in “very senior positions within the Church” and the office of Justin Welby, the Archbishop of Canterbury. As late as 2014 the survivor made another report of the historic sex abuse and found “the response less than adequate.” The Church offered no “real investigation into his disclosures” and “every question arising from the issue of senior disclosures was entirely ignored from the outset by the bishop he reported to, the Head of Safeguarding.”

The report has been made public after the Church initially released its conclusions alone. David Greenwood, a lawyer specialising in helping child abuse victims claim compensation, said in a press release that the church had “indicated that it does not wish to publish the whole report so the survivor is taking the step of providing the report to the press.” The report offers a damning verdict on the Church’s response to allegations by the survivor, referred to as “B”. According to the report, it was “deeply disturbing” that despite B reporting the case to a “large number of people”, some of them claim to have “no memory of the conversations.” “What is surprising about this is that he would be speaking about a serious and sadistic sexual assault allegedly perpetrated by a senior member of the hierarchy. The fact that these conversations could be forgotten about is hard to accept,” Elliott wrote. To avoid legal liability, the report found, the Church “issued instructions that all contact with a survivor was to be ended, causing considerable distress and also placing the survivor at risk.” Elliott said the decision was “reckless” and contrary to the Church of England’s own policy.

Keith Porteous Wood, Executive Director of the National Secular Society, which has been researching clerical abuse for many years and given evidence on the topic at the United Nations, commented: “The problem wasn’t that bishops weren’t trained in such matters, it is the institutional culture of denial and the bullying of the abused and whistleblowers into silence. One report suggests that 13 bishops ignored letters written in the 1990s warning of abuse by Ball on behalf of a victim who later committed suicide. I have seen evidence that such bullying persists to this day. “I hope that the Archbishop’s review into the case of Peter Ball will deal with such bullying and what appears to be the undue influence exerted on the police and CPS by the Church in dealing with this case. “The total failure of procedures, outlined by Ian Elliott, echoes that revealed in the totally damning Cahill Report about the conduct of the Archbishop Hope of York in respect of Robert Waddington. The report has been released ahead of the preliminary hearing of the Goddard inquiry into child sex abuse, which will scrutinise the Church’s record and policies on abuse.

My Comment: The story relating to the Franciscan Provincial priests is notable in the context of this blog in that those familiar with the sexual abuse by members of the Comboni Missionary Order at their Mirfield Seminary in the 1960s and 70s will know that the abuse was reported at the time to members of the Order’s Hierarchy at a local level, a provincial level and at the very centre of the Order’s Curia in Italy at the time that it happened. The Curia Hierarchy of the Comboni Missionary Order of Verona, Italy, still denies that any abuse occurred. One has said that indeed “there has never ever been a case of sexual abuse reported within the Order”! In the case of the three Franciscans the Grand Jury has stated that despite having knowledge of alleged abuse, the three former provincials “acted to protect the institution they led rather than the children and families they served”. How familiar is that to my ears! It is precisely what the Comboni Missionary Order has done throughout the decades – and still does to this day.

In the context of the above news reports from both the USA and France, I note that a BBC Panorama Programme has claimed that the failure to report child abuse should be a crime in the United Kingdom Statute Book. There are many views for and against. In the United Kingdom, the failure to report all crimes was once a felony. Under the Law at the time of the sexual abuse at the Mirfield Seminary an omission or failure to report a crime was regarded as a “Misprision of a Felony”. In effect, it was an offence under the Common Law of England to fail to make reports of a crime to the appropriate authorities when that crime was within their knowledge. The degree of criminality was greater when the omission was committed by persons in a special position of responsibility. The law of “Misprision” was in effect until July 1967 when a new Act of Parliament came into force and was subsequently introduced in 1968 – and the former law was abrogated. Prior to that abrogation of the Act, some 10 reports of sexual abuse that had been perpetrated against those Mirfield child seminarians by Fathers John Pinkman and Domenico Valmaggia, had been made by the young seminarians to priests and superiors at the Mirfield seminary. The failure to take any action against the perpetrators of the abuse at that time – and their failure to report those crimes to the Police as they were obliged to do, constituted arrestable and imprisonable offences. Yet, those priests chose to do nothing at all and their criminal indifference and criminal inaction was nothing less than the equivalent of watching those young, helpless Victims slowly drown in shallow water before their very own eyes simply because they did not want to feel the discomfort of getting their feet wet. The Victims will never forget such callousness. The Catholic Communities of Great Britain to whom the Comboni Missionary Order plead for funds for their mission will not forget such un-Christian callousness either.

The tale of the failure of reports of child abuse to elicit a response from the Anglican Church will be such a familiar tale to all the abused seminarians of the Comboni Missionary Order’s Mirfield Seminary. The Order has entrenchedly cut all contact with those seminarians who were abused by priests of their order. There is no acceptance of the truth that is known to them and admitted by some of them – no dialogue – no apology. Just a wall of silence that the Order hopes will protects them from any accountability. Christian Biblical ethics have not one jot of meaning to some members of the Comboni Missionary Order’s hierarchy. “If you are waiting for an apology, you will wait in vain”, Mark Murray was told when he went to Verona seeking a resolution to the sexual abuse he suffered when a child at Mirfield. The French Cardinal cries, “Never, never, never have I covered up any act of pedophilia.” Father Martin Devinish, the Provincial of the London Province of the Comboni Missionary Order cries, “There are priests alive today who were at Mirfield at the time of the abuse who have NO knowledge of the abuse”! – but Father Martin Devinish neglects to add that, “There are priests alive today who were at Mirfield at the time of the abuse who DO have knowledge of the abuse”! Indeed, one of those priests has stated that he actually told Father Martin Devinish of that abuse himself! It is of little wonder that parish congregations are diminishing in number rapidly throughout the informed Western world. The downfall of Christianity – if it ever does fall down – will be brought about by the self conceit of its own clergy – not by the Victims of clerical child abuse – and not by the little people in the parish pews who are today already walking away from the churches in disgust. That disgust is not solely related to the abuse – but to the sordid, even indeed criminal failure of Church Clerics and Hierarchies to take effective, appropriate and “Christian” action to remedy the crimes and heal the suffering of Victims.

Vatican officials face prosecution in France over failure to report sex abuse priest to police — by National Secular Society

Senior Vatican officials are facing investigation in France over the “non-reporting of crime” and endangering lives, following allegations that clerical sex abuse was not reported to the police.

Father Bernard Preynat was indicted in January 2016 for the alleged abuse of Scouts between 1986 and 1991 and admitted that he sexually abused young Scouts in 1986-1991 in the group which he had run for twenty years.

Prosecutors have now ordered an investigation into senior figures over their “failure to report a crime” after Preynat’s victims said top officials in the Catholic diocese of Lyon, including its Archbishop Cardinal Philippe Barbarin, had failed to report the priest to the police, as required under French law.

In addition, Preynat’s own lawyer told the judge that “the facts had been known by the church authorities since 1991”.

According to AFP, the Vatican had earlier given Cardinal Barbarin its backing, saying it had confidence he would deal with the matter “with great responsibility”. A source close to the cardinal claimed, “Cardinal Barbarin … quite rightly suspended Father Preynat after meeting a first victim and taking advice from Rome, and this, even before a first official complaint was made”.

Keith Porteous Wood, the Executive Director of the National Secular Society, commented:

“If these allegations are true then civil authorities should seek prosecutions and send out a clear message that clerics cannot flout the law with impunity.

“The Vatican’s Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors reiterated in February that bishops had an obligation to ‘signal cases of sexual abuse to civil authorities’, but every announcement by the Pope on this is weaker than the one before. Last year the Pope announced a Church Tribunal (rather than law enforcement) to deal with such bishops, but this Tribunal has never met. On his recent return from Mexico, the Pope declared, even more weakly, that such bishops should resign – not even saying he would force them to do so. The implicit support for Barbarin suggests that even pretensions that bishops should follow the law has been abandoned.

“French clerics seem to be leading the resistance to reporting abuse to civil authorities, thereby allowing abusers to escape jail and helping the abuse to continue unchecked.”

“The Pontifical Commission’s reiteration, referred to above, followed the discovery that at an induction course for new bishops at the Vatican, French Monsignor Tony Attrella told the bishops that they were not obliged to report abuse to state authorities. In 2014 the United Nations castigated the Vatican for a Cardinal congratulating a French bishop for defying the law by refusing to report child abuse.”

In most countries, such reporting is not mandatory, although the United Nations has recommended its introduction, for example in Ireland.

WORLDWIDE CHILD ABUSE – NEWS IN BRIEF

By Brian Mark Hennessey

So much news regarding child abuse has hit the headlines in the last month that it is difficult to know where to start, but perhaps the success of the film “Spotlight” at the Oscars is one of the most notable – not just for the momentous nature of the film itself – but for the subsequent comments. Certainly, the Vatican went very much on the defensive.

Notable was that Cardinal Gerhard Muller, the Prefect for the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith commented in the wake of the film event that “ only a number of individuals, not motivated by their priestly office but instead disturbed or immature, have been proven guilty of sexually abusing minors. The vast majority of priests have been bitterly wronged by the generalizations regarding abuse,” he said, recalling that criminal statistics showed that most sexual abusers were found within the family circle. “They are fathers and other relatives of the victims. One cannot draw the inverse conclusion that most fathers are therefore possible or actual perpetrators.”
Clearly Cardinal Muller had not watched the film as it was stated emphatically therein by a phsycologist expert that, statistically speaking, only about 6% of all clergy are likely to be active paedophiles – not all of them. Muller’s generalisation that the vast majority of priests have been “bitterly wronged” was thus a red herring – or whatever the German equivalent to that is. (Something to do with frankfurters perhaps)!

Interestingly,of course, to the Mirfield 12 Group is that the Comboni Missionary Order has now some 1,600 clergy (priests and brothers). I was saying only recently to Mark Murray that the abuse that happened at Mirfield would be only the tip of the proverbial iceberg and that it is likely that child sexual abuse will have been a worldwide problem in all the Comboni Order’s mission territories and support bases. We know, of course, from our own experience that no punitive action was taken against three child sex abusers at Mirfield – but two were sent to the Missions and one to an Italian parish. Irrespective of the fact that the Comboni Missionary Curia member, Father Pellucci, remarked not so long ago that there “has never ever been a case of child sexual abuse reported within the Order” – statistically speaking, according to the “Spotlight” psychologist, there are about 100 paedophile clerics within the Order. Some of these will certainly be active.

Well, for the benefit of Father Pellucci, just recently a Comboni Missionary in the United States was listed by a Diocesan Report as a child sex abuser – and yet another Comboni Missionary priest, listed on a diocesan list of banned clergy, was to be reported to the diocesan Vicar General if he ever made any contact with diocesan clergy – who were urged, along with their parishoners to pray for this priest. If anyone out there, reading this blog knows of abuse within the Comboni Missionary Order – then please do get in touch with my email address salween4633@yahoo.com – as I am compiling a list for publication – and also for the beneficial purpose of illuminating Father Pellucci’s psychological information blackout.

Cardinal Muller also said (in an interview with German daily Kölner Stadt Anzeiger on a visit to Germany) that he had a problem with the word “hush up” being used “far too lightly” with reference to bishops and sexual abuse cases. “For me”, he said, “hushing something up means deliberately preventing a recognized criminal offence from being punished or not preventing a further offence from occurring.” The true facts are, of course, that not only have the Civil laws of most advanced countries regarded child abuse to be a crime for more than a century, but child sexual abuse has also been enshrined within the Catholic Church’s Canon Law for many many a year – not just as a heinous sin against the sixth decalogue – but as a criminal act which must be reported to the Civil Authorities. It seems that Cardinals and Bishops routinely ignore Canon Law – or perhaps have never read it.

Thus the truth, that Cardinal Muller has ignored – amongst other things it seems – with all the facts of clerical abuse at his finger tips – is that, routinely, most bishops and religious leaders have never taken action to report child sexual abuse to the Civil Authorities. Indeed, in modern times under the tenure of the previous Pope Bendict XVI, countless thousands of erring priests have escaped any civil action and punishment whatsoever – and have been dealt with in secret Vatican courts without the knowledge of the Victims or their legal representatives. How many, I wonder were “re-instated” in parishes or other religious venues? What “hush up”?, asks Cardinal Muller. “The Vatican hush up!”, I respond.

Caedinal Müller continued, “Now, as we all know, in past decades the state of knowledge regarding sexual abuse was very different from that of today. Unfortunately, no one had their eye on the long-term consequences of sexual abuse in those days, as, thank God, we have today. Seriously admonishing the perpetrator was often thought – somewhat naively perhaps – to be enough.” Is Cardinal Muller suggesting, I ask myself, that, historically, sexually abusing children was OK – simply because the long-term effects were not fully appreciated?

Cardinal Müller then pointed out that great advances had been made in the field of human sciences and therefore the way of dealing with perpetrators and victims has greatly changed. What planet is Cardinal Muller on? Has the way the Catholic Church dealt with the Victims of sexual abuse truly changed? Victims were ignored in the past – and they are being ignored now. If he does not believe me – then let him ask the Comboni Missionary Order why they have refused absolutely to talk to or apologise to a single Victim of the alleged 1000 child sexual abuse incidents – each one a crime in its own right – that were perpetrated against children at their Mirfield seminary.

Cardinal Muller’s words continue: “The church needs to recognize that a paradigm shift has occurred regarding sexual abuse – behind which there is no going back”. Expediently, again, Muller ignores that child sexual abuse has long been a civil crime that should be reported to the Civil Authorities. Does he claim that in the past the Catholic Church had some kind of “extra terrestial” exemption from following Civil Law – and the very Human Rights legislation enacted by the United Nations – and to which the Vatican has signed agreement?

The comments of Cardinal Muller sound to me to have a goodly degree of self-interest at heart. Why? Well, Cardinal Muller himself has been accused of covering up abuse. The Jesuit Fr. Klaus Mertes, has witnessed that abuse (in the Jesuit College in Berlin during Muller’s tenure as headmaster in 2010 and when Müller was Bishop of Regensburg from 2002-2012) was ignored by Muller – who decided not to follow the German bishops’ conference’s guidelines which recommended that priests sentenced for sexual abuse of minors should never again be allowed to work with children or young people. How did the then Bishop Muller ignore the bishops’ guidelines? Well, Father Mertes claims that the now Cardinal Muller reinstalled a priest in a parish who had served a prison sentence for abuse.

Fr Klaus Mertes says, quite rightly, that Bishops who contribute towards covering up abuse cases should be removed from episcopal office or step down. Mertes also commented that, “Instead of stepping down, Bishop Müller, who covered up and obscured sexual abuse when he was in the highest position in the church in his diocese, has climbed the hierarchical ladder just like that. He remarks that Cardinal Muller still continually speaks of ‘malicious press campaigns’ against the Catholic church. Fr Mertes says that Cardinal Muller has not a sign of remorse and certainly not of a willingness to deal with the structural problems that the church has in connection with abuse. “For him it is just the case of a few evil churchmen – but otherwise everything is in order in the church and everything can remain just as it always was. In my opinion, that is intolerable – above all, intolerable for the victims,” Mertes continued. “How can this man, who is the head of the Congregation finally responsible for abuse, of all things, ever again be credible?” Well, Cardinal Muller’s time may almost be up anyway. Vatican Watchers are suggesting that Pope Francis, following his visit to Mexico, is now concentrating on Curia reform – and the only way to achieve that is for staff changes – firings and hirings. Apparently, Pope Francis does not have much love for Cardinal Muller – and there is, conveniently, an Archbishop’s post in Germany becoming vacant very soon. We wait – and hope.

In the United States yet another bishop is closely following Cardinal Muller’s approach to defend his handling of clergy sex abuse allegations. The reporter Brian Roewe (National Catholic Reporter) has recorded that U.S. Bishop Joseph Adamec, just hours after the publication of a US Grand Jury report that harshly criticized his handling of clergy sexual abuse allegations, issued a statement defending his record. In a 10-page statement Bishop Joseph Adamec argued that the criticism raised against him in the stinging report was “unfounded.” The report presented an image of the diocese as “rampant with child molestation for decades” – all told, hundreds of children abused by at least 50 priests and religious leaders – while bishops, including Adamec, enabled and concealed the problem. On Adamec specifically, the grand jury concluded, “his biography in the handling of sexual predators was abysmal.” Bishop Adamec states that he had a process. That process, he said, began with himself or the vicar general meeting with the accused priest, followed by a meeting with the alleged victim, if they were willing. From there, he said he sent the priest for psychiatric evaluation, and would base his decision on the priest’s future in ministry from that report. “The Bishop universally followed the advice of the psychiatric professional,” said the statement. The Grand Jury, however, stressed the difference between a “known offender” not being specifically diagnosed as a pedophile – and a “known offender” being cleared of being a predator. Because of the result of the psychiatric report, it seems, that the bishop had been making decisions as to whether measures taken against “known offenders” should be acted upon. The self-reporting nature of the evaluations rendered them useless, it said, adding that such a simplistic diagnosis approach resulted in insufficient evidence to deem the accused a sex offender, and allowed “justification for poor judgement and reckless conduct.” “Hiding behind that tissue thin layer of justification, the Bishops returned these monsters to ministry,” the Grand Jury said. That rings a bell in my ear! Where was it that the child sexual abusers of the Mirfield seminary were sent? Yes! – you are right – the Hierarchy of the Comboni Missionary Order returned those monsters to ministry!

And last, but not least, we had testimony from Cardinal Pell and I quote from the reporter, Joshua McElwee. “Cardinal George Pell, one of the highest-ranking officials at the Vatican, admitted to an Australian government commission that when a schoolboy came to him decades ago to report that a Catholic teacher was “misbehaving with boys” he did not report the matter to authorities. His excuse was, that when the boy came to him in 1974 “he just mentioned it casually in conversation; he never asked me to do anything.” The boy, the cardinal said, was complaining about a member of the Edmund Rice Christian Brothers named Edward Dowlan, who would later be convicted of abusing at least 20 boys at six Australian schools starting in 1971. Commission Chair Peter McClellan asked the cardinal whether he should have done more to report the event, and possibly put an end to the abuse. “With the experience of forty years later, certainly I would agree that I should have done more,” replied Pell. “I didn’t do anything about it,” he continued. “I eventually inquired with the school chaplain.” The cardinal said he thought Dowlan’s order would handle the complaint. “I had no idea that the Christian Brothers were covering up in the way in which it’s now apparent,” said Pell. It is the first known time that a Vatican official of such authority has admitted historic inaction in the face of possible sexual abuse. Following Pell’s admission, a lawyer representing abuse survivors pressed him firmly on the matter. “Why on earth, Cardinal, didn’t you take the information that you had about the complaint … to the police, to the investigators, to the insurance companies, or to the Christian Brothers themselves?” asked the counsel. “Why do we hear about it this week for the first time?” The response was, “I mentioned it to the principal and he said the matter was being looked after,” replied the cardinal. “Now in the light of subsequent events that was radically insufficient but at that time … given the unspecified nature of the accusations, I thought that was something that was fair enough.” In respect to another report of abuse made to him, Cardinal Pell – now famously responded – “It was a sad story, but it was not of much interest to me at the time!”.

Well, further comment on my part is almost superfluous! I feel as I have been listening to the same tape recording for most of my life. In just the past month the senior prelates of the “reformed” Roman Catholic Church of Pope Francis are continuing to hand out the nails to be hammered into the Church’s own coffin! When will the Pope begin to act firmly on his promises that there is no place in the Catholic Church for those who abuse children – and that Bishops and Religious leaders who cover up the child sexual abuse of children must resign?

Brian Mark Hennessy