Clericalism, Celibacy and Child Sexual Abuse In the Catholic Church in Australia

DES CAHILL and PETER WILKINSON.

Emeritus Professor Des Cahill and Dr Peter Wilkinson are both Catholic priests who resigned from ministry and married. They were consultants to the Royal Commission and co-authored a recently released five-year RMIT University study on Child Sexual Abuse in the Catholic Church. Their report can be read online at:

Click to access child-sex-abuse-and-the-catholic-church.pdf

The Final Report of the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse was published on 15 December 2017. Among its 409 recommendations was one which is proving controversial, namely, the introduction of voluntary celibacy for diocesan priests. There are compelling reasons why the Commission chose to urge a change to a long-held tradition.

The Australian Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse has recommended that the Australian Catholic Bishops Conference (ACBC) formally petition Pope Francis to allow voluntary celibacy for diocesan priests (Rec. 16, 18). This is unsurprising, given the overwhelming scientific and evidentiary material that it has considered. Also unsurprising was the Commission’s repetition of its previous recommendation that the ACBC seek clarification from the Holy See on matters related to the seal of confession.

Initially the Commissioners were quite tentative about whether it would be more appropriate for them to be making recommendations regarding canon law and other sensitive church matters. When they expressed their hesitation directly to the metropolitan archbishops in the Case Study 50 public hearings in February 2017, Archbishop Coleridge of Brisbane reassured them that “it would be very appropriate for the Royal Commission to make whatever recommendation they judge to be in the best interests of children and therefore the best interests of the Church” and that “he personally would welcome any suggestions or recommendations that the Royal Commission would present”. As the Commission commented in the Final Report, “There may be leaders and members of some institutions who resent the intrusion of the Royal Commission into their affairs. However, if the problems we have identified are to be adequately addressed, changes must be made to the culture, structure and governance practices of institutions. A failure to act will inevitably lead to the continuing sexual abuse of children, some of whom will suffer lifelong harm. That harm can be devastating for the individual. It also has a cost to the entire Australian community.”

The Australian Royal Commission has been the world’s most thorough examination ever of clerical sexual abuse in the Catholic Church. In its breadth and depth, it surpasses all 26 other major inquiries in Belgium, Canada, Ireland, the Netherlands, the UK and the US. It is comprised of 17 volumes with 7,323 pages. It found that criminality against children by Catholic priests and religious was nested in a culture of destructive clericalism.

Clerical Sexual Offending
In a series of scarifying results comparable to the US evidence, the Royal Commission found that between 1950 and 2012, one in thirteen diocesan priests, one in seventeen religious order priests and an estimated one in eight religious brothers sexually offended against children. The offending was worst in the regional dioceses of Sale, followed by Sandhurst (Bendigo), Port Pirie and Lismore and least in the archdiocese of Adelaide. It was even more horrific in some of the residential settings run by the religious Brothers of St John of God and the Christian Brothers.

Altogether there were 572 Catholic priest offenders and 597 religious brother offenders. There were some, but few, offending sisters. Over 3000 survivors alleged that these priests and religious had sexually abused them when they were children. All these offenders had promised or vowed never to engage in sexual acts, abuse or otherwise, with another person, and never to marry.
Anglican ordained ministers (a total of 247) also offended, mainly in Anglican grammar schools, particularly boarding schools. Major issues in the Church of England Boys’ Society, especially in Tasmania, Sydney and Adelaide, surpassed those in the Evangelical wing of the Australian Anglican Church where ministers were ordained into the Anglo-Catholic tradition, which the Commission described as authoritarian, opposed to the ordination of women, exalting in the authority of the priest and making an unhealthy separation between clergy and lay people. The Uniting Church also had offending ministers, but only three had been convicted since 1950. However, no other major religious group in Australia came close to the level of Catholic criminality, although in some smaller groups, particularly the Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Salvation Army, there were significant problems.

Sexual offending against children can be traced back to the earliest years of Christianity. It has always been a problem, especially where celibacy has been enforced. It was an early problem in the Catholic Church in Australia. When some religious sisters of the congregation founded by Mother (now Saint) Mary MacKillop, discovered in 1870 that the Franciscan parish priest in Kapunda, a parish of the Adelaide Diocese, was sexually abusing children and reported it, a cabal of his fellow Franciscans prevailed on the Franciscan bishop of Adelaide to excommunicate Mother Mary. Later on during World War Two, Archbishop Beovich of Adelaide suppressed a small male religious order in the suburb of Thebarton because of their sexual abuse of vulnerable children in their care.
In navigating its way through the waters of religious freedom and its limits, the Royal Commission could only recommend that the Australian bishops submit to the Holy See a proposal for a change to the law of clerical celibacy for diocesan priests. Any decision on the matter can only be made by the Pope. The Commission was well aware that its recommendations cannot apply to another sovereign state and that there would be criticism about its recommendations as attacks on religious freedom. However, the right to religious freedom is a relative, not an absolute, right. Individuals have the freedom to be bigoted or to sexually abuse, but not the right. The State has the responsibility to protect itself against bad religion or bad religious practices in order to maintain public safety, good order, health and the morals of its people. While the State can make accommodations where deemed appropriate (e.g. Sikhs wearing the sacred dagger), the civil and criminal law in a secular, democratic society that respects the rights of all must generally over-ride religious law, whether it be Anglican Church law, Catholic canon law, Jewish religious law or Islamic Shari’ah law. A healthy society needs healthy religion.

Celibacy and clericalism
The Commission has made two other recommendations on celibacy: 1) that all Catholic religious institutes in Australia implement measures to address the risks of harm to children and the potential psychological and sexual dysfunction associated with a celibate rule of religious life (Rec. 16, 19); and 2) that the ACBC and all religious institutes in Australia further develop and regularly evaluate and continually improve their processes for selecting, screening and training candidates for priestly and religious life, as well as their processes for ongoing formation, support and supervision (Rec. 16, 20). Both are designed to encourage and protect a mature and healthy celibate commitment to God for the service of the community. The Commission carefully acknowledged that ‘such a personal choice is valid and to be respected’ and stated that having consecrated celibate religious persons supported by a caring community life was desirable.

While the evidence supporting the recommendation to vary the rule of clerical celibacy was overwhelming, the Commission wrestled with the question as to whether celibacy had been ‘a direct cause’ of child sexual abuse. It was clearly convinced that it was ‘a significant factor’ in this Catholic catastrophe, especially when combined with other risk factors. The Commission was impressed by the evidence of the Irish psychotherapist, Marie Keenan and her indictment of the Church, its structures and ‘hegemonic masculinity’. Her much cited study was supported by the research of many others, including the priest psychiatrists and researchers such as Richard Sipe and Stephen Rossetti in the US, Eugene Drewermann in Germany and David Ranson in Australia. Other important studies came from the University of Sydney, RMIT University, the Ulm University Hospital, the Boston University School of Medicine and Marquette University in Milwaukee.

The Royal Commission found that, aside from the important individual factors such as psychosexual immaturity and mal-development, lack of intimacy and sexual deprivation, the key variable amongst the structural and cultural factors was clericalism. In its view, the very high occurrence of sexual abuse of children by Catholic priests and religious and the inadequate handling of abuse complaints by Catholic bishops and religious superiors were elements of the same incubating clericalist culture. It found that clericalism within the Catholic Church is characterised by several outstanding identifiers:

 The sacramental belief that the priest is an ‘ontologically changed’ sacred personage. It was this belief that led to unregulated power and an unquestioned trust which was able to be exploited by priest perpetrators and deceiving bishops. The Commission noted that offenders were caught in a vortex of unregulated public power and their own powerlessness within church structures, and that the nature of Church power was highly genderised.

 The theological view that the Catholic Church is a two-tiered ‘perfect society’, with the clergy placed on pedestals and the rights of the child completely neglected. This was extended to the beliefs that the Church is above the State, canon law outranks state/civil law and that the Church has nothing to learn from the outside world.

 Some bishops and clergy, hiding behind their clericalism facade, lived in ‘a kind of clerical bubble’, catastrophically failing to understand their obligations under civil and criminal law, and being fundamentally opposed to transparency, accountability and collaboration. The Commission observed that many priests were narcissistic in their thought and actions.

 The concentration of personal power in the bishops as ‘little monarchs’ in their own dioceses meant they had few checks and balances and no separation of powers. Their key concern was the avoidance of scandal and the maintenance of the culture of secrecy. The exclusion of lay people, especially women, impacted negatively on good governance and decision-making.

 The flawed selection of bishops was a key factor according to the Commission. The criteria seemed to be their perceived orthodoxy and deferential obedience, together with their limited training and education for Catholic leadership. The Commission has recommended that the Australian bishops request the Holy See to publish the selection criteria and that lay people be involved in the selection process.

 The Commission bemoaned the lack of consultative, inclusive and transparent models of governance of dioceses and religious institutes.
The Royal Commission also noted its concern about the current resurgence of clericalism in some Catholic seminaries and amongst younger clergy.

Already across Australia, Catholic schools have responded very well to the abuse crisis. With a succession of policies and practices, and now run almost completely by lay teaching professionals, mostly married but with many gay teachers, Catholic children are now being educated in very safe institutions.
For most ordinary Catholics, a determination by the Holy See to allow married men to be ordained and tp minister as diocesan Catholic priests would be a momentous pastoral decision, but one likely to be welcomed and readily accepted. Australian Catholics are already accepting of former Anglican married clergy now working in many local parishes.

Moving forward

Overcoming this Catholic catastrophe will require new ways of thinking about a more diverse, flexible and professional priesthood, and about sexuality and gender amongst other things. The Church has to become a much more professional operation, overcoming the lack of ethical professionalism that has characterised the behaviour of bishops and priests in the sexual abuse crisis.

Transitioning to a more inclusive and flexible priesthood will need to be carefully managed and calibrated because up until now consecrated celibacy has been the linchpin of the clericalist system. Voluntary celibacy will not be a panacea, but it can give hope and strength to a renewed Church over the coming decades. The Catholic Truth, Justice and Healing Council which played an excellent facilitating and mediating role during the Royal Commission has already urged the government to implement all its recommendations. At the same time the Australian Catholic Bishops Conference must move quickly to implement all the carefully considered recommendations that apply to the Catholic Church in Australia, but above all in a transparent, accountable and synodal manner.

New Accusations From Aversa: “Abuse Suffered by a Seminarian at Age 13”

“The children Entered and left the priest’s house,” the shadow of the pedophilia on the Church of Naples
By the Editor of Preti Pedofili

“The Reverend will have to be promptly admonished” – is the conclusion of a case that is stored in the basement of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith where the kilometer-long shelves of the archives are housed. It refers to the case of a priest of Ponticelli.

The case was filed a year ago after three years of investigations based on documentation collated by the diocese of Naples. It comprised of reports of events of serious abuse that had taken place in the early 1990s.

The bureaucratic process was concluded by the Vatican with the simple advice to the Archbishop of Naples to forward a “warning” to the former parish priest of Ponticelli. The medical reports, the documents, and above all, the testimony of the victim, Diego Esposito, today a married man, suffering from deep depression, was apparently insufficient enough to start further canonical procedures and to punish the priest. The latter, in the interim, had been hidden by the Neapolitan curia and taken out of circulation. Now he lives as a guest in a top secret religious establishment where he continues to celebrate Mass and administers the sacraments. Was there a cover up? Unavoidable doubts emerged because the Vatican investigation was closed and filed in the basement of the former Holy Office. The decision was the adnministering of a warning and for the correction of the “inappropriate behavior” of the priest.

A second victim, GS, has chosen in the meantime to break his silence about his twenty years of shame and pain. He recounted in an interview in which it emerged that not only his abuse but also a rapacious and predatory attitude on the part of the priest towards a number of children. “I would like the Church to understand the need to punish these priests and finally make them incapable of harming other children”the Victim said. The shocking details of the circumstances of GS’s complaint had the power to break the walls of silence and gave courage to other victims of Ponticelli to come out into the open. Evidently there were several teenagers who had entered the priest’s ‘radar’ and they had been enticed by him. In the evidence of the lawyer who defends Diego Esposito and Carlo Grezio, other allegations surfaced after exposure in the Morning Inquiry News. Contacts, speaking on the base of anonymity, provided witness statements, letters and even a petition to Pope Benedict XVI. These allegations had been forwarded previously to the Vatican in 2010 by the city of Aversa.

If canonical justice does not work, even if the Pope or the Vatican does not respond to the victims, then civil justice should undertake it. “This is a case that has just arrived and I’m still reading the papers. They comprise additional medical reports and a protocol response from the Congregation of the Faith. That provides certainty that the Vatican received the package with the complaint and a copy of the letter sent in 2010 to Pope Benedict XVI. The victim in that case is now a 38-year-old man, originally from Aversa, who from 1992 to 1999 attended the archiepiscopal seminary. At the age of 13 he suffered the abuse of a religious who taught in the establishment. The Religious forced him to have relationships by enclosing the boy it in a sort of cupboard. The documents detail all the facts, circumstances and witnesses. There is little room for imagination. “The case of Ponticelli has uncovered a can of worms,” said the lawyer shaking his head in disbelief. On one of the sheets, scrolling through the reading, he identifies again the name of the bishop Lucio Lemmo, the vicar of the diocese of Naples, which keeps reappearing in the documentation.

Naturally, nobody wants to hear the word “cover-up”. However, the victim of the city of Aversa (Caserta Province in Campania) has never received any reply from the Pope at any time and it is as if his story had ended in a black hole, swallowed up and buried forever.

COMMENTS BY BRIAN MARK HENNESSY OF THE COMBONI SURVIVOR GROUP

I read the story above for the first time today just prior to writing these comments – and it is unnerving – not just because it is yet another tale of callous and brutal abuse of young seminarians and other boys – but because of the parallels that I and friends at the UK seminary of the Italian Order, the Comboni Missionaries of Verona in Italy, experienced in the 1960’s and 70’s.

I will spare the reader the details of all the abuse, but one phrase leapt out of the text above and it was ‘inappropriate behaviour’. Those were precisely the same two words used to describe the abuse suffered by one of my fellow seminarians. In respect to my friend, who still suffers from the stress and betrayal of the abuse by an Italian priest when he had just turned the age of 14, the words ‘inappropriate behavior’ describe nightly occurrences of the priest washing the boys naked body in a supposed ‘baptismal rite’.

It progressed, over the course of time, to the boy then washing the naked body of the priest in this fantasy of a baptism. The boy would be told to close his eyes at the point at which the priest ejaculated.

It did not end there. Another Biblical fantasy enticed the naked boy to lie on the priest’s naked body in the priest’s bed and place his mouth upon the priest’s mouth – so that in another ritual – with Biblical connotations to the story of the prophet Elisha who breathed the Spirit into a boy’s mouth and raised him from the dead – so the priest would breath the Spirit into the boy.

And if that was not sufficiently bizarre to disturb the mind of any child, on the first occasion that the priest stripped naked in front of the boy, that boy was confronted with the sight of a raw scar of a cross carved into the priest’s torso by a sharp instrument.

Years later when the boy was a grown man and reported the facts of this abuse to the Superior General of the Comboni Order in Italy, he received a letter in which it was stated that the priest had been withdrawn from the Missions in Uganda and an investigation had taken place.
The Conclusion was that the priest had admitted the events and that the Order had determined that the priest was guilty of ‘inappropriate behaviour’! The intention was, at that stage that the priest would return to Uganda where he ran a parish in which he founded a school for children – which was named after him! No reports appear to have been made by the Order to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and the priest is currently housed in a secret establishment in Italy.

The parallels are uncanny! This case and details of other cases were taken by hand of Cardinal Vincent Nichols, Archbishop of Westminster, to the Vatican and delivered by him to CDF personally two years ago this very week. The document of 174 pages details 1000 crimes of child sexual abuse committed against UK child and teenage seminarians by priests of the Comboni Misisonary Order. There has been no response from the Vatican!

Pope to Religious: Your Hearts Must be Open 24-7
A ‘CRUX’ Article by Cindy Wooden

Lift up your eyes from your smart-phones and see your brothers and sisters, those who share your journey of faith and those who are longing for the Word of life, Pope Francis told consecrated men and women. “Today’s frantic pace leads us to close many doors to encounter, often for fear of others,” the pope said in his homily for the feast of the Presentation of the Lord and the World Day for Consecrated Life. “Only shopping malls and internet connections are always open.” Yet believers’ hearts must be open as well, because every believer receives the faith from someone and is called to share it with others, the pope said at the Mass Feb. 2 in St. Peter’s Basilica.

The feast day commemorates the 40th day after Jesus’ birth when, in accordance with ancient Jewish practice, Mary and Joseph took him to the temple and presented him to the Lord. The feast’s Gospel reading from St. Luke recounts how the aged Simeon and Anna, who were praying in the temple, recognized Jesus as the Messiah. The Mass, attended by thousands of women and men belonging to religious orders, began with the traditional blessing of candles and a prayer that God would guide people toward his son, “the light that has no end.” In his homily, Francis focused on a series of encounters: Between people and Jesus; between the young Mary and Joseph and the elderly Simeon and Anna; and between individuals and members of their religious communities or their neighborhoods.

“In the Christian East,” the pope explained, “this feast is called the ‘feast of Encounter’: It is the encounter between God, who became a child to bring newness to our world, and an expectant humanity.”

The pope, himself a Jesuit, told the religious that their own journeys were “born of an encounter and a call” which, while highly personal, took place in the context of a family, a parish or a community. Members of religious orders must realize that they need each other – young and old – to renew and strengthen their knowledge of the Lord, he said. They must never “toss aside” the elderly members because “if the young are called to open new doors, the elderly have the keys. One’s brothers or sisters in the community are a gift to be cherished, he said before adding a plea: “May we never look at the screen of our cellphone more than the eyes of our brothers or sisters, or focus more on our software than on the Lord.”

Francis said strengthening the intergenerational bonds in a religious community also is an antidote to “the barren rhetoric of ‘the good old days’” and the only way “to silence those who believe that ‘everything is going wrong here.’” Religious life, with its vows of poverty, chastity and obedience, always has been countercultural, he said. And yet it is the source of true freedom because while “the life of this world pursues selfish pleasures and desires, the consecrated life frees our affections of every possession in order fully to love God and other people.”

COMMENT BY BRIAN MARK HENNESSY OF THE COMBONI SURVIVOR GROUP

It is somewhat excruciatingly painful for me as a Victim of childhood sexual abuse by a priest of the Comboni Missionary Order to witness the number of lost opportunities by Pope Francis to talk about an issue which must be openly and firmly addressed by him to the Religious of the Catholic Church. Yes – child sexual abuse might be the very last thing that Religious Communities wish to hear about, but it is the biblical ‘mote’ in the eye of the Church and it needs to be addressed again and again and again.

We only have to look at the statistics that were unearthed during the Australian Royal Commission about the rate of abuse within Religious communities to understand why. In one community 40% of Religious were abusing children. In another it was 20% – and the overall average was 14% abusing. In the UK Mirfield seminary of the Comboni Missionary Order it was also 14%. That may not sound likes it’s the end of the earth to some readers – but the result of sexual abuse at the rate of 14% in that seminary produced the horrifying statistic that between the late 1950’s and the early 80’s the number of known incidents of child sexual abuse against seminarians – as young as 13 years of age – was nigh on 1000 incidents –each incident a heinous crime against a child in its own right.

The abuse was reported at the time to priests within the order on 26 occasions that we know of. In the cases of two priests nothing was done about it until two years later by which time those child predators had abused countless more children.

Three priests were then moved from the seminary. Where did they send them? One was sent to a parish in Italy in the Diocese of Como. Another was sent to Uganda to look after the Catholic Uganda Scouts Movement. The third was also sent to Uganda where he founded and ran a school for children. They all had access to even more children! Since those times the Victims have been struggling with their lives each with his own demons and scars. The Comboni Missionary Order is silent. It has refused to discuss the issues. It has prevaricated at all levels. It has made vague press statements to the effect that so much time has passed that now the truth will never be known, but ‘if’ it ever happened they are ‘truly sorry’. That grudging ‘sorry’ was churned out only for the press.

‘Sorrow’ has never been expressed by the Order to the Victims of the abuse… and worse than that the manner in which they have expressed such ‘sorrow’ in the full glare of the public was quite notable in 2015. In the early summer of that year a Victim of the Mirfield abuse travelled to Verona in Italy to see the priest who had abused him. They had a brief hushed and reflective conversation in the Chapel of the Order’s Mother House during which the Priest had expressed his sorrow and the Victim had forgiven his abuser. On arrival back in the UK, the postman delivered a summons from the Criminal Court of Verona in Italy to the Victim on indictments of trespassing, stalking and interfering in the life of the priest (the abuser). The Judge duly dismissed the case as without any foundation what so ever. The Comboni Missionary Order mustered the gall to appeal. The Appeal Judge dismissed the case for the Order had presented no new evidences – and he praised the Victim for his forgiveness of the priest who had abused him. The Comboni Missionary Order does not yet ‘Get It’ and recent events suggest that nor does this Pope – for he has just missed the perfect opportunity to express his concerns.

Sex Abuse in Catholic Church Blamed on Money, Power Dynamics

BY DIANA BROWN FEB 2, 2018

The kind of authority and integrity attributed to a trusted religious figures, like Catholic priests, makes reporting sexual allegations extremely difficult for victims, especially children.

In October 1992, Irish singer-songwriter Sinead O’Connor tore up a picture of Pope John Paul II on “Saturday Night Live,” sparking a huge public outcry and backlash against the artist. O’Connor said she did it to protest the widespread child abuse perpetrated by the Catholic Church. Since then, these claims against the church have been proven accurate, with numerous scandals coming to light — as well as chilling proof of coverups and payoffs.

So how could this happen? And what could possibly have led to such extensive behavior among so many high-ranking bishops, cardinals and leaders within the Catholic Church? That’s what Stuff They Don’t Want You To Know investigate in Catholics, Children and Conspiracy: The Epidemic of Abuse. Hosts Matt Frederick, Ben Bowlin and Noel Brown take a look at the history of the Roman Catholic Church, the many allegations laid at its doorstep and what might have been the cause of such horrific behavior in this episode of the podcast.

The Catholic Church is an extremely powerful religious organization, with a past that stretches through centuries of human history and provides the foundation for nearly all Christian sects and denominations. It controls a vast amount of wealth — though no one’s really sure how much — but estimates are in the billions. It also claims millions of faithful believers all over the world.

And while there’s no denying the church has done a lot of good for education and health care, it’s also responsible for atrocities such as the Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition. Perhaps most heartbreaking, though, are the numerous cases of child sexual abuse that have come to light, including the generations of young Catholic boys around the world who have been victimized. Even more disturbing is that the top officials of the church were repeatedly informed and warned of the behavior. But instead of putting a stop to it, the accused priests and cardinals were simply relocated to other parishes, or were required to spend time in a Catholic treatment center before being returned to their parishes.

The kind of authority and integrity attributed to a trusted religious figure makes reporting these allegations extremely difficult on the victims, especially when it’s a child. And sexual abuse in general is already one of the most underreported crimes. That gave the church an enormous advantage over the abused. But the hierarchy of the church helped too, and the higher ranked an accused priest was, it seems, the more he was protected. In fact, instead of being punished, some of the abusers were essentially promoted when their actions came to light. The Catholic Church used its vast fortune to cover up the accusations, too, paying out hush money to victims in exchange for their silence.

So why has the Catholic priesthood struggled so much with the issue of sexual abuse? Many

 
The kind of authority and integrity attributed to a trusted religious figures, like Catholic priests, makes reporting sexual allegations extremely difficult for victims, especially children.

In October 1992, Irish singer-songwriter Sinead O’Connor tore up a picture of Pope John Paul II on “Saturday Night Live,” sparking a huge public outcry and backlash against the artist. O’Connor said she did it to protest the widespread child abuse perpetrated by the Catholic Church. Since then, these claims against the church have been proven accurate, with numerous scandals coming to light — as well as chilling proof of coverups and payoffs.

So how could this happen? And what could possibly have led to such extensive behavior among so many high-ranking bishops, cardinals and leaders within the Catholic Church? That’s what Stuff They Don’t Want You To Know investigate in Catholics, Children and Conspiracy: The Epidemic of Abuse. Hosts Matt Frederick, Ben Bowlin and Noel Brown take a look at the history of the Roman Catholic Church, the many allegations laid at its doorstep and what might have been the cause of such horrific behavior in this episode of the podcast.

The Catholic Church is an extremely powerful religious organization, with a past that stretches through centuries of human history and provides the foundation for nearly all Christian sects and denominations. It controls a vast amount of wealth — though no one’s really sure how much — but estimates are in the billions. It also claims millions of faithful believers all over the world.

And while there’s no denying the church has done a lot of good for education and health care, it’s also responsible for atrocities such as the Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition. Perhaps most heartbreaking, though, are the numerous cases of child sexual abuse that have come to light, including the generations of young Catholic boys around the world who have been victimized. Even more disturbing is that the top officials of the church were repeatedly informed and warned of the behavior. But instead of putting a stop to it, the accused priests and cardinals were simply relocated to other parishes, or were required to spend time in a Catholic treatment center before being returned to their parishes.

The kind of authority and integrity attributed to a trusted religious figure makes reporting these allegations extremely difficult on the victims, especially when it’s a child. And sexual abuse in general is already one of the most underreported crimes. That gave the church an enormous advantage over the abused. But the hierarchy of the church helped too, and the higher ranked an accused priest was, it seems, the more he was protected. In fact, instead of being punished, some of the abusers were essentially promoted when their actions came to light. The Catholic Church used its vast fortune to cover up the accusations, too, paying out hush money to victims in exchange for their silence.

So why has the Catholic priesthood struggled so much with the issue of sexual abuse? Many have pointed to the vows of chastity taken by priests, or the lack of women in authority positions as possible explanations. Others have suggested that it is, in fact, not a problem unique to the Catholic Church at all; rather, many religious institutions, as well as schools, sports teams and workplaces all have similar power dynamics and opportunities for abuse, and while the Catholic Church certainly has room to improve, it’s being unfairly singled out.

Whatever the reasons, it’s true that a real, and horrifying, conspiracy was committed by this extraordinarily powerful institution, and the consequences of its actions (or lack of) are just as real and horrifying. Listen to the entire podcast as Matt, Ben and Noel take a hard look at the crimes and confessions of the Catholic Church.

Child Abuse Inquiry to Cover ‘Concealment of Evidence
Against MPs’

Inquiry to examine whether whips’ offices failed to report allegations against politicians

A ‘GUARDIAN’ Article by Owen Bowcott Legal affairs correspondent
Allegations that the parliamentary whips’ offices suppressed evidence of MPs’ involvement in abuse are to be examined by the child abuse inquiry. Unveiling priorities for the Westminster strand of its investigation, the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse said it would also look into whether police and prosecutors were prevented from pursuing sensitive cases involving politicians.

Substantive hearings into the claims – some of the most extraordinary to come before IICSA – are scheduled to be heard over a three-week period in March 2019.

Andrew O’Connor QC, counsel to inquiry, acknowledged that public concern over reports of a Westminster paedophile ring centred on Dolphin Square in London had “diminished” following a police investigation that decided not to bring any charges.But there remain many issues that need to be examined in terms of how public institutions and bodies responded to allegations, he said. O’Connor listed six main areas on which the Westminster investigation will focus. On the role of parliamentary whips, he suggested: “Is it possible that on occasions in the past [they] may have received allegations of child sexual abuse made against politicians in their own party, and then failed to report those allegations, or to take any other appropriate steps? “Is it possible, indeed, that the whips may have taken active steps to conceal such allegations – in part to avoid embarrassing publicity and in part to gain a hold over the politician in question?”

Two other strands, O’Connor explained, would involve examining whether police or prosecutors were prevented from pursuing cases. “A number of retired police officers have claimed that they were indeed ‘warned off’ investigating possible cases of child sexual abuse committed by senior politicians in the 1960s, 70s and 80s,” he said. “Several of these cases are linked to the Elm Guest House affair, which was itself the subject of investigation by the Metropolitan police in its Operations Fairbank and Fernbridge.” Other areas will include how political parties responded to allegations, for example the way the Liberal party dealt with claims against its MP Cyril Smith in Rochdale.

The two other focuses for the investigation will be how the honours system dealt with individuals alleged to have been involved in child sex abuse and official contacts with the Paedophile Information Exchange and its membership in the 1970s and 1980s. O’Connor said that the three main intelligence agencies – MI5, MI6 and GCHQ – have been asked to search for relevant material. IICSA will not investigate whether the former prime minister Edward Heath was a paedophile, O’Connor said. “It will not be appropriate for the inquiry,” he cautioned, “… to make findings as to whether any individual allegations of child sexual abuse are true or false.”
Seven anonymous complainants have been given core participant status as well as the Home Office, the Met, the Labour party and other organisations. There were three submissions on Wednesday from others seeking core participant status in this strand of the investigation. Daniel Janner QC, the son of the former Labour MP and peer Greville Janner, argued that he should be allowed to question “fantasists” making accusations of abuse against his father. “This strand risks turning into a witch-hunt of dead politicians,” he declared. David Greenwood, a solicitor representing a former “rent boy” identified only as WM-A1, said his client alleged that he had been raped by Heath. The claim has already been considered by Wiltshire police. Sam Stein QC, who represents an anonymous man referred to as WM-A4, said his experience of systematic past abuse was relevant to the inquiry.The chair of the inquiry, Prof Alexis Jay, will decide at a later date whether to make them core participants. Daniel Janner has already been accorded that status in a separate section of the inquiry looking at Lord Janner’s alleged activities in Leicestershire.

The Judas Kiss
By Brian Mark Hennessy

Perhaps to everyone, except my parents and my elder sister, I was a rather ungainly infant. I was boss-eyed for a start. That meant that I was always the ‘goalie’ in any football scrap on the grass verge at the corner of the street. The cure for that eye condition in the late 1940’s and early 50’s was to sit at a contraption and look through binocular-type lenses with moveable arms. There was the image of a cage in one lens and a lion in the other and by moving the arms you could get the lion into the cage. I remember being gently coached by my father in this process, but it had no effect whatsoever and I ended up wearing little glasses with circular lenses and wire arms upon my nose for some years. Even as an altar boy, some time later on, it would take me an age to focus on the wicks of the tall candles at the altar for High Mass in an attempt to light them and I would often get a grunt from the celebrant as he came up in the rear carrying his chalice. More than once that gruff Irishman grabbed the taper and lit the remaining candles himself. I was mortified of course, but I had one moment of glory at a confirmation ceremony when I was the crozier bearer for Archbishop John Henry King of the Portsmouth diocese. I still have a small one inch square photo of that one moment of childhood distinction somewhere.

At the age of 11 years or so, having grown up alongside my gruff, but jovial, Irish curate, Father Nugent, who was to me really the epitomy of a gentle giant, I worked alongside him during holidays on his farm at Farlington. He rented the grounds of the crumbling Farlington Mansion and had cattle there and cared for the orchard. It was within walking distance of my home. I rushed there each day to be with him as he lived out the tradition of his peasant Irish background. He was everything I wanted to be. One Sunday a Comboni Missionary, named Father Felix Centis, visited St Colman’s parish in Cosham and gave a sermon about life as a missionary in Africa. I didn’t know it at the time, but he had never been there. Nevertheless, I was enthralled and scrambled to gather up some pamphlets that he left in the Church atrium. I read them from cover to cover time and again – and in secret I wrote to him and told him I wanted to be a missionary priest. It was not an idle dream. It was a passion that gripped me in a way that was so overwhelming that I can only compare it with the emotions of a teenager in the grip of the searing emotions of a first love.

A moment later, or so it seems, I was a seminarian at Mirfield in Yorkshire. It was the very end of 1960 and I was living my dream. Concerned deeply with living a life of Saintly purity I would go to sleep with my arms outstretched above my bed covers and say Hail Marys until I fell asleep. The other boys would have fits of the giggles as they stood at the end of my bed and mocked me – until that is, the Vice Rector, Father Ceresoli, now the Emeritus Bishop of Eritrea, walked up and down the dormitory until lights out reciting the psalms in his breviary. I was living in my own Heaven full of saints and angels upon this very earth.

There were some bitter winters at Roe Head on the hill above Mirfield. I remember a snow drift one year above my head height – but come snow, hale or sunshine, we had cold compulsory showers in the morning. Due to that cold, I understand, I developed a kidney infection.

Whether it was really something to do with the extremes of the weather on an isolated Yorkshire hilltop I don’t know, but I ended up in hospital for a while and then the infirmary of the seminary. The priest in charge of the infirmary was named Domenico Valmaggia, an Italian from the mountain district of Como, North of Milan. He was gruff, but amusing, just like Father Nugent who had been my idol a few years before, but unlike Father Nugent he had an agenda which can only be described as sexual self gratification. Twice a day he would come into the infirmary when the community was taking its meals, lock the door, tell me to strip off and kneel on the edge of the bed. He would kneel before me and carry out ‘medical inspections’ to ensure that everything was ‘working properly’ following the intrusive and painful process of a renal inspection at the hospital. I did not know the word then, but his ‘inspection’ is called ‘masturbation’! Yet he was God’s representative on my earth and truly for me – it was only a ‘medical inspection’. Nevertheless, something happened to me after those events. I was subconsciously in total denial of what had taken place, but eventually became ‘screwed up’, for want of a better description, and at some time after taking my first vows in the Order, I departed from the way of life and distanced myself from the vision of my missionary boyhood dreams.

That it was actually ‘masturbation’ did not occur to me until years later when I overheard a conversation in a barber shop in London just behind St Martin in the Fields Church. The barber and customer were talking about a news report that the latter had been reading as he waited. The subject was child sexual abuse and the grooming ‘modus operandi’ of paedophiles and how they beguiled the innocent. At that moment, the Mirfield seminary infirmary came rushing into my mind like a tsunami and there and then I had a panic attack. Incredibly, it was the first moment that I realised that I had been betrayed by the one I trusted – and whom I thought had always been looking out for me and caring for me. Instead Valmaggia had betrayed me with the kiss of a Judas! The difference, however, between Judas and Valmaggia was that the Gospel Judas could not live with the betrayal of his beloved Jesus, but Valmaggia was at ease with his betrayal – and he destroyed the lives of myself and many other boys with the same betrayal of trust – the Judas kiss!

I then needed an expalantion. I contacted the Comboni Order at Sunningdale and sent a letter to Cardinal Cormac Murphy O’Connor informing him of my distress and my need for a response. The Cardinal wrote back to me in a kindly enough manner, but explained that the Combonis were not within his jurisdiction. The Combonis did not respond at all – and so, eventually, I rang their Provincial Superior and asked him to trace the location of Father Valmaggia because I needed to speak to him and understand ‘Why’?! I felt that an understanding would put me at rest and enable me to put the distorted fragments of my life in some perspective again. The Comboni Provincial Superior at Sunningdale told me that Father Valmaggia had left the Order and was probably dead. The truth was that Valmaggia was not dead. Indeed, the Order knew precisely where he was – and, eventually, when he did die years later, they published his death in an official journal of the Order. Once more the Order that had protected him whilst he was abusing seminarians at the Mirfield seminary – had protected Valmagia again.

My accusation that they had knowledge of his abuse is not unfounded. Surprising as it may seem, they did know of his abuse at Mirfield as there are many witness accounts of reports made to the Rector (and other priests at the establishment) confirming his abuse of many boys. It is now known also that the Provincial Superior and even the Superior General of the Order were well aware of the abuse, but they did nothing until Valmaggia’s crimes were so numerous that they could no longer withhold action. The Order itself was wholly complicit – and had looked the other way. Canon Law demands that all clerics guilty of crimes against the sixth Decalogue are reported to the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. It appears that no action was taken at all – and Father Valmaggia was ‘incardinated’ in a parish within his native diocese of Como in Italy – where he would have had continuous contact with yet more children. A Judas kiss was bestowed by the Hierarchy of the Comboni Missionary Order on the cheeks of so many innocents – merely to protect their vanity as a religious clerical elite – and presumably so as not to impede the flow of donations from an oblivious lay community into their large coffers.

A Response to Ed Condon’s Catholic Herald Article: Entitled:
“Pope Francis’s Defence Of Bishop Barros Is A Rare Media Blunder”

By Brian Mark Hennessy of the Comboni Survivor Group (CSG)

If Catholics truly believe that the subject of clerical sexual abuse is receding from the spotlight – then they are hopelessly wrong. They are in for a shock when the full extent of both the depravity and the cover up by Bishops and the leaders of Religious Institutions eventually becomes known. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has admitted that it has some 2000 cases of clerical child sexual abuse awaiting attention. Quite how many it is dealing with is actually unknown.

One case I could describe fully was documented by the Comboni CSA Survivor Group. It is 177 pages long and relates to an estimated 1000 acts of sexual abuse of UK child and teen seminarians – each incident a crime in its own right. Some 25 seminarians have reported abuse by seven members of the staff in the period from the late 1950’s to the early 80’s – albeit the document does not include all of those cases and nor all of the clerics involved. A copy of the document was forwarded to over 1000 members of the Comboni Missionary Order three years ago. There was no response from anyone in the Order’s hierarchy. However, three priests of the Order did respond. Two said it was all lies, but eventually admitted they had not read it. One, an old Italian priest of the Order contacted me and said that he could not understand English very well, but had sat down and read the report from cover to cover over a period of three hours – and he told me, “he felt ashamed.” After a year of inaction by the Comboni Missionary Order, which had remained silent on the case and refused all dialogue with the Survivors, I sought the assistance of Vincent Nichols, the Cardinal Archbishop of Westminster. Two years ago to this very day, as it so happens, he took a copy to Rome by hand and delivered it to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. There has been no response whatsoever from the Vatican.

The number of outstanding and as yet unrevealed cases of child sexual abuse by clerics of the Catholic Church means that these issues will be in the public arena for many many years to come. Yet, the Vatican stalls, fails to provide the resources in terms of legal experts, money, accommodation and administrative personnel to deal with the scale of the problem – and leaves survivors in the dark. No investigations which include survivors appear to take place. No legal framework appears to exist. It seems that they have closed their ears, eyes, minds and hearts and are just waiting for the Survivors to die. Presumably the files will then be carted off to the Sistine Chapel as kindling for the next Papal election.

Famously Marie Collins resigned over the failure to provide even the most fundamental of courtesies to Survivors. All that is needed is a letter saying simply, “Thank you for your correspondence which we promise to attend to as soon as we are able. We deeply regret the distress you have suffered as a result of the events you have described. We will update you from time to time on progress and will appoint a contact in your Diocesan Area who will be able to keep you informed and provide you with any additional assistance you may need etc etc etc….”

Sometimes I think to myself – I will give the Vatican a hand and answer the letters for them. It’s an open offer and they will not even have to pay me! If they understood even a farthing’s worth of what is going on in the hearts, minds and souls of the Victims of clerical sexual abuse – which includes a devastatingly destructive element of betrayal – then the Vatican would understand, but their only concerns are their reputation, loss of face and the welfare of the criminals that they protect. That is not a picture of a “moral” Church, but a redundant Church – and statistics of Church attendance demonstrate it.

US Catholic church attendance is now only 21%. Latin American Catholics were 92% of total population in 1970, but have reduced to 59% today and are headed to 39% by 2030. The rate of decline in the UK is such that if the decrease continues at the same pace there will not be a single Catholic priest or worshipper in the land in a hundred years time. The same effect is felt all the way across Europe. The overall result is that the “Eternal, Universal Roman Catholic Church” is destined to be a minority world religion and confined to the Continent of Africa. If that is what the Pope and the Roman Curia wish for –then just carry on doing what you are doing now!

Pope Francis’s Defence Of Bishop Barros
Is A Rare Media Blunder

A Catholic Herald Article by Ed Condon

The storm surrounding Pope Francis’s latest defence of the embattled Chilean Bishop Barros has, following an unprecedented public correction from Cardinal Séan O’Malley and a penitent retraction from the Pope himself, begun to abate. It is hard to discuss anything touching clerical sexual abuse with a level of dispassion, and specific cases even more so. When the matter involves such a large number of victims of a convicted abuser, as it does in this case, it’s almost impossible. But for those of us who want justice for victims and for the Church’s moral authority to be restored, and especially for those of us who wish the Pope well in his personal ministry, some evaluation of the affair needs to be made. In this specific instance, leaving aside the wider questions of Bishop Barros’s appointment in the first place, it was a deeply regrettable failure of style.

Pope Francis’s enormous media image has allowed him to command attention like few popes before him. He has a number of personal traits which play incredibly well in the age of rolling news and social media. He is spontaneous, and has little or no fear of speaking off-the-cuff, even on sensitive issues. He has a natural candor, something which shows through whenever he speaks, so that when he does address an issue, few are ever left wondering what he actually thinks. He also has a known impatience with process, formality, and what is often termed “legalism,”and instead he favours what is often styled a “pastoral” approach, jumping right in to messy situations. In some instances, these instincts have served him well. When he chooses to, he can get his message across at a volume previous popes would have struggled to reach. But his free-wheeling style can sometimes backfire, this certainly happened last week.
A number of victims of a serial sex abuser, Fr Karadima, have accused Bishop Barros of helping cover up their abuse. Despite this, Pope Francis has stood resolutely behind Barros. On Friday, he was asked again about Barros while in Chile. He responded: “The day they bring me proof against Bishop Barros, I’ll speak. There is not one shred of proof against him. It’s all calumny. Is that clear?” It was a characteristically blunt response from the Pope, but it kicked off a serious, and totally understandable backlash from Fr Karadima’s victims, whom he’d effectively accused of slander.

The whole affair has drawn fresh attention to the terrible scandals of clerical sexual abuse, something which many Catholics had hoped was receding from the spotlight following serious efforts to address past failings. Ensuring that there be no repetition of horrible past events, and instilling confidence in the faithful that the matter is well in hand, is a task to which Pope Francis’s otherwise effective gifts of communication seem singularly ill-suited. As we have seen, it is not a subject which lends itself to off-the-cuff remarks. Past failures, especially those involving bishops accused of cover-ups and collusion, were failures to follow law and proper procedure – something Benedict XVI did considerable work to correct. Pope Francis’s impatience with formal process, and his famous allergy to “doctors of the law” place him at a unique disadvantage when confronted with cases like that of Bishop Barros.
Victims of sexual abuse are only ever truly respected when their abusers are seen and treated as what they are: criminals. This extends to those accused of winking at their abuse. Convicting the guilty, and exonerating the innocent, is a legal task.

For all we know, it could be that the allegations against Bishop Barros are unfounded. But in order to make the kind of full-throated defence which the Pope made of Bishop Barros, it is not enough to say you have not seen any proof. To have any kind of credibility, there needs to be a full legal process which examines the allegations and finds them baseless. Such a process does exist, it was Pope Francis who set it up with his motu proprio Come una madre amorevole, which established legal norms for handling allegations of negligence, especially when connected with sexual abuse. But since its issuing in June of 2016, little has been done to bring this mechanism to life. The section of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith which handles cases connected to sexual abuse continues to complain of a serious shortage of qualified staff and resources.Similarly, Cardinal O’Malley’s intervention commanded headlines because he was the head of the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors – past tense, the Commission lapsed at the end of last year, and the pope has yet to renew its mandate and membership.

These examples illustrate a blind spot in the Francis pontificate, one which has dogged his sincere efforts to reform the curia and which becomes even more problematic when it touches on sexual abuse: his impatience. This Pope is very comfortable making big decisions, for example setting up the C9 Council of Cardinals, the Prefecture for the Economy, and the Commission for the Protection of Minors. But the good intentions of these institutions are doomed to stall without patient and consistent papal attention and support for the nitty-gritty of their work, and, in sweeping works of legal reform, that means lawyers.

So-called doctors of the law are, as we know, a suspect class in the Vatican right now. And even before the Francis pontificate, conscientious canonists are often saddled with the reputation of being nay-sayers. In fact, a good canonist, whether serving the Pope or a diocesan bishop, almost never says “no,” far more often their job is to say “not that way.” Pope Francis might find that his priorities and interests were served rather better if he had a few more lawyers working for him. Properly deployed he would find that they strengthen his hand, rather than tying it back.
Whether in bringing justice to victims, or reforming the curia, Pope Francis needs help. The Church is a society of more than a billion people. Governing it properly requires dedicated labourers as much as dynamic leadership. It is a great shame, and coming at an increasingly obvious cost, that those around Pope Francis have convinced him the two are mutually exclusive.

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

A Response to Ed Condon’s Catholic Herald Article: Entitled:
“Pope Francis’s Defence Of Bishop Barros Is A Rare Media Blunder”

By Brian Mark Hennessy of the Comboni Survivor Group (CSG)

If Catholics truly believe that the subject of clerical sexual abuse is receding from the spotlight – then they are hopelessly wrong. They are in for a shock when the full extent of both the depravity and the cover up by Bishops and the leaders of Religious Institutions eventually becomes known. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has admitted that it has some 2000 cases of clerical child sexual abuse awaiting attention. Quite how many it is dealing with is actually unknown.

One case I could describe fully was documented by the Comboni CSA Survivor Group. It is 177 pages long and relates to an estimated 1000 acts of sexual abuse of UK child and teen seminarians – each incident a crime in its own right. Some 25 seminarians have reported abuse by seven members of the staff in the period from the late 1950’s to the early 80’s – albeit the document does not include all of those cases and nor all of the clerics involved. A copy of the document was forwarded to over 1000 members of the Comboni Missionary Order three years ago. There was no response from anyone in the Order’s hierarchy. However, three priests of the Order did respond. Two said it was all lies, but eventually admitted they had not read it. One, an old Italian priest of the Order contacted me and said that he could not understand English very well, but had sat down and read the report from cover to cover over a period of three hours – and he told me, “he felt ashamed.” After a year of inaction by the Comboni Missionary Order, which had remained silent on the case and refused all dialogue with the Survivors, I sought the assistance of Vincent Nichols, the Cardinal Archbishop of Westminster. Two years ago to this very day, as it so happens, he took a copy to Rome by hand and delivered it to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. There has been no response whatsoever from the Vatican.

The number of outstanding and as yet unrevealed cases of child sexual abuse by clerics of the Catholic Church means that these issues will be in the public arena for many many years to come. Yet, the Vatican stalls, fails to provide the resources in terms of legal experts, money, accommodation and administrative personnel to deal with the scale of the problem – and leaves survivors in the dark. No investigations which include survivors appear to take place. No legal framework appears to exist. It seems that they have closed their ears, eyes, minds and hearts and are just waiting for the Survivors to die. Presumably the files will then be carted off to the Sistine Chapel as kindling for the next Papal election.

Famously Marie Collins resigned over the failure to provide even the most fundamental of courtesies to Survivors. All that is needed is a letter saying simply, “Thank you for your correspondence which we promise to attend to as soon as we are able. We deeply regret the distress you have suffered as a result of the events you have described. We will update you from time to time on progress and will appoint a contact in your Diocesan Area who will be able to keep you informed and provide you with any additional assistance you may need etc etc etc….”

Sometimes I think to myself – I will give the Vatican a hand and answer the letters for them. It’s an open offer and they will not even have to pay me! If they understood even a farthing’s worth of what is going on in the hearts, minds and souls of the Victims of clerical sexual abuse – which includes a devastatingly destructive element of betrayal – then the Vatican would understand, but their only concerns are their reputation, loss of face and the welfare of the criminals that they protect. That is not a picture of a “moral” Church, but a redundant Church – and statistics of Church attendance demonstrate it.

US Catholic church attendance is now only 21%. Latin American Catholics were 92% of total population in 1970, but have reduced to 59% today and are headed to 39% by 2030. The rate of decline in the UK is such that if the decrease continues at the same pace there will not be a single Catholic priest or worshipper in the land in a hundred years time. The same effect is felt all the way across Europe. The overall result is that the “Eternal, Universal Roman Catholic Church” is destined to be a minority world religion and confined to the Continent of Africa. If that is what the Pope and the Roman Curia wish for –then just carry on doing what you are doing now!

Chilean Survivor Of Clergy Sex Abuse Denies He Is Lying

A National Catholic Reporter Article by Heidi Schlumpf, Maria Benevento

Despite repeated accusations by Pope Francis that survivors of clergy sex abuse in Chile are guilty of “slander” and “calumny,” Juan Carlos Cruz is still speaking out about the abuse he suffered at the hands of a Chilean priest — and about the cover-up by church leaders there.

During his visit to Chile last week and on the papal plane Jan. 21, Pope Francis defended Bishop Juan Barros Madrid of Osorno, Chile, insisting there is no evidence the prelate ignored or covered up sexual abuse by Fr. Fernando Karadima. But Cruz told NCR Jan. 23 that he and other survivors testified — in criminal, civil and church proceedings — that while “the bigger abuse was behind closed doors,” Barros was in the room when Karadima touched the genitals and put his tongue in the mouth of Cruz and other victims.
“That’s what Barros saw,” said Cruz, who now lives in Wilmington, Delaware. “I don’t know if I should have taken a photograph for more evidence. What other evidence than our testimony, and that of so many others, do they need?”

He believes it is impossible that Barros and others did not see the abuse. “They were standing by me when things happened,” Cruz said. “If they want to say they saw nothing that is an absolute lie.”

Cruz and other victims of Karadima have testified in court and in letters sent to church officials that Barros and other church officials — including bishops Andrés Arteaga, an auxiliary in Santiago, Tomislav Koljatic of Linares, Chile, and Horacio Valenzuela of Talca, Chile — knew of the abuse and covered it up.

The Chilean bishops have consistently denied witnessing any abuse by Karadima or participating in a cover up. Barros and Valenzuela denied the accusations most recently in an interview with Cruxnow.com, in a story published Jan. 17. Juan Carlos Claret, a spokesperson for Laicos de Osorno, a group of laypeople from Barros’ diocese that has vocally opposed him, called Francis’ comments “unbelievable words.” Claret told Cooperativa.cl, “Really we can’t understand why the pope thinks the problem is the word ‘proof’ and not the fact that he has treated the victims like liars, like slanderers.”

At a press conference aboard the papal plane Jan. 21, Francis apologized for earlier statements when he said he had not seen “proof” that Barros knew of Karadima’s abusive behaviors. He made a distinction between “proof,” which is a legal principle, and “evidence.” “I should have said ‘evidence,’ ” Francis told journalists. “I know that many abused people cannot bring forward proof. They don’t have it. Or maybe sometimes they have it and they are ashamed and they suffer in silence.

The drama of those who were abused is tremendous.” “With this, I have to say I apologize, because the word ‘proof’ hurt,” Francis said.
“Here the pope isn’t being totally clear,” Claret said. “There are proofs. What the pope does is discredit the testimonies which are the only proof of the abuses that exists.”Karadima, now 87, was a charismatic and highly influential cleric in Chile for decades. As pastor of the El Bosque parish in an upscale Santiago neighborhood, he counted bishops and priests among his disciples. That ended in 2011 when the Vatican ordered him to “retire to a life of prayer and penitence” for sexually abusing minors. Barros, now 61, arrived at the El Bosque parish as a seminarian in 1972. Karadima served as his spiritual director and helped him obtain a post as secretary for Cardinal Juan Francisco Fresno in 1983. He held this position until 1990. He was ordained a bishop in 1995 serving as an auxiliary in Valparaíso, Chile, and then as bishop of Iquique, Chile, in 2000 and of the military ordinatiate in 2004. Francis made him bishop of Osorno in 2015.

In 2010, Cruz, along with James Hamilton and José Andres Murillo, went public with accusations that Karadima had abused them decades before when they were teenagers. They would learn that allegations of abuse had been leveled against Karadima as far back as the 1980s, but nothing had ever come of them .Chilean prosecutors opened a case against Karadima in 2010 and at least four other men came forward with similar accusations. The case was eventually dropped because the statute of limitations had expired, but a judge stressed there wasn’t a lack of proof. Cruz has written to church officials including the papal nuncio in Chile multiple times, before and after Francis was elected pope. Frustrated by what he called a lack of action, in 2015 he made public letters sent to nuncio Archbishop Ivo Scapolo. Cruz also confirmed to NCR that he repeatedly sought to meet with Francis about his case, with letters to the papal nuncio, through conversations with Cardinal Sean O’Malley of Boston, and in a letter to Francis himself.

When Jorge Mario Bergoglio of Argentina was first elected to the papacy, Cruz was hopeful for justice against the church leaders who covered up or ignored the abuse — including Cardinal Ricardo Ezzati of Santiago and his predecessor, Cardinal Francisco Javier Errázuriz Ossa. “We [Chile and Argentina] are next door to each other, we speak the same language and have the same culture. And [Francis] knew about the Karadima case because it was so big in the region,” Cruz said. “But as the years went by, I saw him to be worse than I had expected.”