Cardinal faces new questions (CHURCH PAEDOPHILIA SCANDAL UPDATE)

The Evening Standard ^ | November 26, 2002 | The Evening Standard

[MadIvan]

A Catholic priest who has admitted interfering with a 17-year-old youth has been allowed to keep his post despite tough new church guidelines, it was disclosed today.

The case comes after Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, the leader of Roman Catholics in England and Wales, attempted to draw a line under recent scandals.

At the weekend the Cardinal urged Catholics to stand firm in the face of "attack" over child abuse allegations.

But the Cardinal faced claims that the case had breached the supposedly tough new guidelines he has championed.

The BBC Radio 4 Today programme reported that the victim was 17 when the unnamed priest, who was then in his 30s, "inappropriately interfered" with him at a seminary in 1986.

When confronted in an e-mail in April the priest wrote back within hours admitting what he had done no fewer than four times and asking for forgiveness, the programme reported.

"I can only ask you to forgive the incident. I am all to aware of my own shortcomings," the priest was said to have written.

"We are taught by our Saviour to forgive those who ask forgiveness from him, yes 70 times seven."

God may forgive, but the Church should not. Get out. - Ivan

The priest contacted Church authorities who brought in their own child protection team and the matter was referred to the police but the victim did not want to take the case further.

The priest has remained in his post and even continues as governor of a local school, the programme reported.

The Cardinal stressed in a letter to The Times newspaper last week that abuser priests could be sacked even if there was no police investigation.

"Since the introduction of very strict guidelines introduced by the Roman Catholic Church in 2001 in cases where no prosecution results but allegations are regarded as well-founded action would now be taken to remove a priest from active ministry," he wrote.

The case is likely to provoke fresh criticism of the Cardinal who appointed Father Michael Hill as chaplain at Gatwick Airport in 1985 despite being warned he was a threat to children.

Hill was jailed on Thursday for five years after admitting six offences of indecent assault against three boys. Hill, 68, has already served a jail term for similar offences.

The Cardinal attempted to draw a line under the issue in a letter read to worshippers at Masses across the country last weekend.

"I am very conscious that all our priests and people, feeling the weight of that pressure, are deeply concerned," he said.

The Cardinal said he deeply regretted any damage that had been done following a "mistaken decision in the past" and added: "Failure of course has to be acknowledged, but we also recognise the gift of the Lord's forgiveness."

He added that people were aware of the goodness and trustworthiness of "the overwhelming majority of our priests".

[MadIvan]

And the plot thickens.

Regards, Ivan

[MadIvan]

Bump!

[thedilg]

"And the plot thickens."

It surely does. I am so concerned that you have the same homosexual problem in England as we have in the US. Thankfully it does not seem as widespread.

It is my opinion that we will not solve our problems until seminaries are expunged from homosexual friendly policies and teachers. There is a whole raft of cardinals and bishops are released.

Today, we here in the states, are looking at charges against 600 priests with 300 already dismissed. Not a great percentage given 42,000 priests (<2%). On the one hand it is an infinitely great number given the priesthood. I ran across an estimate that 2/3rds of the cardinals/bishops were guilty of cover up. Not one has been fired.

I expect this to change in the near future. Cardinal Law's laundry has been put out for all to see. I expect to see some pretty awful stuff in the next year. California has passed a law that the statute of limitation will not apply for a period of one year starting 1 Jan 2003. Cardinal Mahoney of LA and others will be in the docks. Of course this will be challenged in the courts as unconstitutional.
We will see.

Godspeed, The Dilg

[MadIvan]

I am absolutely certain we have the same problem that you do. It is probably as widespread, in proportion to the size of our church to yours.

Reform and discipline need to be put in place. I realise there is a recruiting problem, but they have no choice. We cannot have this go on any further.

Regards, Ivan

[thedilg]

"I realise there is a recruiting problem, but they have no choice. We cannot have this go on any further"

I believe that our recruiting problem is caused by the homosexual friendly policies present in too many seminaries. Incredibly these seminaries are hostile to the young orthodox seminarian. Can you believe that they beckon to 2% of the population and put up not welcome signs to the other 98%.

In those seminaries that cater to the orthodox young men are overfull. They have to turn away applicants for lack of space.

Godspeed, The Dilg

[Desdemona]

Ivan, you all have our sympathy. Just don't let it effect your faith. These are MEN, not God, not the Church, not the Faith. MEN.

Just keep in mind, God willing, it will end.

[WaveThatFlag]

Ivan, just what, exactly is "inappropriate interference"? Sounds like a football penalty to me. In any case, when a priest inappropriately interferes with a 17 year-old, are we still talking about pedophilia?

[MadIvan]

Ivan, just what, exactly is "inappropriate interference"? Sounds like a football penalty to me. In any case, when a priest inappropriately interferes with a 17 year-old, are we still talking about pedophilia?

Yes. The language is attempting to be genteel.

Regards, Ivan

[WaveThatFlag]

OK, in the strictest legal sense, maybe we are talking about pedophilia (not that the homosexual community with agree with you on that one), but a 17 year-old seminary student is not a 9 year-old alterboy. When I was 17, nobody "inappropriately interefered" without my consent.

[MadIvan]

Well the law was recently changed to lower the age of consent from 18 to 16. If this occured before the lowering, it was a crime.

Regards, Ivan

[thedilg]

"New Hampshire and Massachusetts, the percentage of abusing priests well exceeds 10%. That is to say that here there is an extreme localized problem"

To think that 10% of the priests in NH and MA are abusing is most devastating. It is important to understand how this came about so that it will not be repeated. I suppose that it is the result of the leadership. Those cardinals/bishops guilty must be replaced.

This may explain my puzzelment on how the northeast is simultaneously the most liberal and the most Catholic section of our country. What a contradiction.

I used to worry that the communists would infiltrate the seminaries and then corrupt the church. Never in a million years would I have thought that it would be infiltration by homosexuals and their fellow travelers. Lord have mercy on us.

Godspeed, The Dilg