Dear AnAmericanMother,
Actually, in many cases, dealing with the abusive priests outside of the judicial systems wasn't quite illegal. In many dioceses, the civil authorities preferred that the Church handle these matters internally. I've read of cases where incidents were reported to the police, and where the police directly informed the local bishop, asking him to take care of it, or where the prosecutors referred the cases back to the bishop.
One thing that upsets me is when folks make the scandal out to be Catholic hierarchs acting in absolute dark secrecy to subvert the laws of land in order to protect molestor priests. The reality is more that folks didn't know how to handle these cases, and often DIDN'T WANT TO HANDLE these cases, from judges on down.
sitetest
Well, I'm sure some bishops were acting with the best of intentions, believing that they were doing the right thing. On the other hand, there were homosexual or sympathizing clerics who wanted to cover for their buddies. In fact, the priest here who helped the offender I mentioned flee the country was prosecuted as an accessory after the fact or for aiding and abetting the escape of a fugitive, can't remember which. He was retired early . . . BTW he was a flaming queen, they should have gotten rid of him a LONG time before. But in the climate of the 70s when homosexuality was beginning to be fashionable, that was exactly contrary to the Spirit of the Age. It's even more contrary to it now, but the Church has belatedly realized that you can't give in to that, even a little . . .
"In many dioceses, the civil authorities preferred that the Church handle these matters internally."
Huh? Law Enforcement didn't want the Church to report the crimes of priests committing the crimes of sexual molestation of minors? Where is this cited?