Therapy led to soaring abuse rate in Irish Church

Share Button
Irish bishops often sent sex offender priests for therapy rather than using Church law which orders the defrocking of paedophile clergy
 
From Times Online
 
March 19, 2010

By David Quinn

The Church in Ireland has been embroiled by sex abuse scandals since last Summer. Just this week, in fact, Cardinal Sean Brady has been under intense pressure to resign after it was revealed that he did not inform police about the abuse of children by one of Ireland’s most notorious child abusers, Fr Brendan Smyth.
    

Of course, the Church has actually been rocked by these scandals since the mid-1990s, but the publication of two official reports investigating abuse by priests and religious have been published since last summer and as a result the saga of clerical sex abuse has rarely been out of the Irish headlines since then.

The first report – the Ryan report – investigated abuse in mainly Church-run institutions for children. The second – the Murphy report – detailed abuse by clergy in the Dublin archdiocese.

These documents revealed little that was new. It was the sheer detail they contained that made them so shocking.

To judge from the Murphy report, child abuse by clergy peaked in Dublin in the 1970s and 1980s. Allegations of abuse were disastrously mishandled by the Dublin archdiocese up until roughly the mid-1990s after which time diocesan authorities finally began to deal with allegations properly.

The Catholic Church in Ireland now operates arguably the most robust child protection system in the country, something that is rarely acknowledged. The public still appears to believe that the Church has learned nothing, and done nothing. This is simply not true.

The search for the causes of clerical sex abuse has been ongoing. The male-only priesthood has been blamed. The hierarchical structure has been blamed. Clericalism has (rightly) been blamed. A desire to protect the reputation of the institution has (rightly) been blamed.

But two of the chief culprits are held to be canon law and the rule of celibacy.

Canon law, or Church law, has been blamed for forcing bishops to cover up the allegations, to hide them, and certainly it is true that anyone taking part in a canonical investigation is required to swear an oath of secrecy, or confidentiality.

But the Murphy report itself is very interesting about canon law. It points out that a big problem with this law isn’t that it was used, but that it wasn’t used.

It says: “The Church authorities failed to implement most of their own canon law rules on dealing with child sex abuse…canon law appears to have fallen into disuse and disrespect during the mid 20th century. In particular, there was little or no experience of operating the penal (that is, the criminal) provision of that law… for many years offenders were neither prosecuted nor made accountable within the Church.”

Why did it fall into disuse and disrespect? It was because priests and bishops began to regard it as being overly legalistic and too focused on punishment. They decided it lacked compassion.

Therefore, they stopped using it. No longer did priests accused of child abuse face a canonical trial and the possibility of “defrocking”.

Instead, and with disastrous consequences, they were sent for therapy and then, “cured”, they were reassigned to ministry.

The bottom line is that if canon law had been used properly, fewer children would have been abused. Civil authorities would still not have been informed, but priests found guilty of child abuse under Church law would have been punished and likely removed from ministry making it more difficult for them to offend again.

What about the rule of celibacy? The Murphy report doesn’t comment on this because it is outside its competence. But apparently it is not outside the competence of any number of commentators who like to point the finger straight at this rule and blame the paedophile scandals on it, in part at least.

They claim that the ‘thwarting’ of normal sexual desire is bound to end in the perverting of desire, that in some cases it will be misdirected into desire for children.

This is a big claim for which there should be big evidence because if it is not true, then it is an appalling smear that affects not just celibate priests, but anyone who is celibate, whether that be voluntary or involuntary.

If celibacy is really so dangerous, should we, for example, prevent celibates from being anywhere near young children as one former government minister here in Ireland once suggested? How many lay teachers would that affect?

In fact, no evidence has ever been advanced to show that celibates who look after children are more likely to be abusers than non-celibates who look after children.

What we do know is that while children have been abused in Catholic-run institutions, they have also been abused in institutions run by other Churches, in State-run institutions, in institutions run by other bodies, and of course, in their own homes as well.

A great deal of the coverage attaching to the issue of child abuse by Catholic clergy is undoubtedly motivated by animus towards the Catholic Church itself because abuse by other organisations rarely receives such coverage.

This animus is motivated by rules and beliefs many outsiders find incomprehensible and grotesque, for example, the celibacy rule.

But unless evidence can be found to prove that there is something about Catholicism itself which produces abuse on a scale found in no other institution that cares for children, then we will have to assume this animus is, in fact, a prejudice and treat it as such.

David Quinn is a columnist for The Irish Independent, and a writer on religious and social affairs

……………………………………………
Your Comments

Clare Dempsey wrote:

With regards to Simon Cooper’s comment – We can’t deny that such events would be absolutely horrible to experience (I can’t use a word strong enough to describe how much so), but I really think it’s such a shame – though not really incomprehensible given the event – for people to lose their faith in God due to the actions of their irresponsible and grossly behaved Priests.

April 4, 2010 2:02 PM BST on community.timesonline.co.uk Recommend?  Report Abuse 

Permalink 

Arno G wrote:

Therapy is a bad idea for all offenders as it helps criminals become better liars whilst giving them a sympathetic ear.

I like the oriental way of having the community totally ignore these people on release.

April 4, 2010 11:38 AM BST on community.timesonline.co.uk Recommend? (1)  Report Abuse 

Permalink 

Simon Cooper wrote:

I have a holiday home in Majorca, Spain and have met many dozens of Majorcans and Spanish men and women during the last twenty years. Our conversations always include religion, of course, and it has always struck and shocked me how many people had stories of abuse from their priests throughout their childhood. A large percentage, perhaps 75%, spoke of being fondled or sexually touched, and worse, while explaining they had lost their faith because of this.

April 4, 2010 8:39 AM BST on community.timesonline.co.uk Recommend? (2)  Report Abuse 

Permalink 

Alberto Gonzalez wrote:

Easy fix:

1) Repeal any statue of limitations for sex crimes.

2) Add an additional penalties for crimes where trust was abused by a spiritual leader to commit sex crimes.

3) Send these people to prison where they belong.

April 4, 2010 1:19 AM BST on community.timesonline.co.uk Recommend? (3)  Report Abuse 

Permalink 

S Thomas wrote:

Christianity is, and has been from its beginning, a form of idolatry, or false worship. Yahweh says at Isa 43:11: “I, even I, am Yahweh, and beside me there is no saviour.” That leaves no room for the salvific doctrine of the Christ of the New Testament.

At best, he is a false prophet: 1) Matt 12:40 — Christ was not 3 days and 3 nights in the heart of the earth, count them; and 2) Matt 16:28: second coming prophesied, did not occur for those there standing.

Yahweh is clear about false prophets. At Deuteronomy 18:22: “When a prophet speaketh in the name of Yahweh, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which Yahweh hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.”

Thus we should not be afraid of Christ of the NT, and even less his Vicar at Rome, neither pay the institution which he heads any regard.

All false teachings and doctrines eventually will collapse from within, or be destroyed from without. The Catholic Church has served its (evil) purpose, and its false Christ cannot save it. Isaiah 45:7 says: “I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I Yahweh do all these things.” Clearly, Yahweh allowed this idolatrous, and now, as we all can see, clearly evil institution, to rise up. Now, he is bringing it down.

It was prophesied at Jer 33:15: “In those days, and at that time, will I cause the Branch of righteousness to grow up unto David; and he shall execute judgment and righteousness in the land.” Clearly this will not come through Christianity of whatever stripe, for even if Christ is taken to be of the seed of David (which he is not), the branch claimed for him is one that is debarred, as stated at Jer 22:30: “Thus saith Yahweh, Write ye this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days: for no man of his seed shall prosper, sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah.”

The end t

April 3, 2010 11:44 PM BST on community.timesonline.co.uk Recommend? (4)  Report Abuse 

Permalink 

Mike Ryan wrote:

There must be a complete clear out of all clarical abusers of children, and all those clerics who connived at child abuse. Since few such people are resigning a possible solution could be for the police to take action; and ensure they get out. You could lead by example Cardinal Brady and resign !

April 3, 2010 12:32 PM BST on community.timesonline.co.uk Recommend? (1)  Report Abuse 

Permalink 

Peter Kennedy wrote:

David Quinn you are a Ponce You Write “The Catholic Church in Ireland now operates arguably the most robust child protection system in the country, something that is rarely acknowledged”

Can you imagine leaving your Children at a Creche or daycare center then finding out that they have been thoroughly sexually abused, Would you (1) Expect parents to ever send their children back there again? and (2)Giving a raucous round of applause to the former abusers for not now abusing their children as they “acknowledge” that their children are now more Robustly protected.

April 3, 2010 12:04 PM BST on community.timesonline.co.uk Recommend? (3)  Report Abuse 

Permalink 

Peter Kennedy wrote:

Anyone who could follow the teaching of this church after the Revelations of Sexual Abuse complicity to it highest echelons really does need Mental health attention.

April 3, 2010 11:47 AM BST on community.timesonline.co.uk Recommend? (6)  Report Abuse 

Permalink 

Douglas Bruce wrote:

Why don’t the Caths reconsider their celibacy regime – and, while they’re about it, maybe also the single-sex priesthood?

April 3, 2010 7:15 AM BST on community.timesonline.co.uk Recommend? (5)  Report Abuse 

Permalink 

Gary Wraughton wrote:

“Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” didn’t work in the Catholic Church any more than it did the U.S. Military. TOTAL BAN is the only way to go.

April 3, 2010 2:40 AM BST on community.timesonline.co.uk Recommend? (5) 

Leave a Reply