Catholic priests accused of sexual abuse in Ireland want their accusers to be identified in writing according to the liberal group, the Association of Catholic Priests (ACP).
During a meeting with the National Board for Safeguarding Children in the Catholic Church the Association put forward a series of changes in guidelines for those stepping aside from ministry after being accused of sexual abuse.
The Association, a voluntary organization, now represents over 1,000 Irish priests and they believe it is the priest’s right to know the name / names of their accusers. They are also asking that the way the news of an accusation is conveyed to the priests be changed.
However abuse survivors have a different view.
Read more news on sexual abuse here
Marie Collins, an abuse survivor and a member of the Lynott Committee which drew up the child protection guidelines “Our Children Our Church” said these changes would deter victims from coming forward.
She told the Irish Independent, “It has to be remembered that an abuser has a great deal of power over a victim; the fear of their abuser's anger at being exposed is very real for a victim."
She said the accused would know the name of their accuser as the investigation continued, “It should not be at this very early stage."
Collins said the guidelines for “Our Children Our Church” were drawn up under guidance from a senior police official. They had advised that “if the name of the person making the allegation is given to the accused at the first meeting there is a grave danger this will interfere with a subsequent criminal investigation”.
She also advised that if these changes were made they would lead to the accused priest attempting to influence or threaten their accuser.
The Association also told Elliot that announcing that priests were stepping aside from the ministerial role at Mass should be changed. They said this “almost inevitably leads to the priest being considered guilty”.
The group wants the clergyman to be told of the accusation by a religious superior in a supportive atmosphere, in advance.
They also raised concern over cases where accusations are made but the alleged victims refused to pursue the matter or make a statement with the police. They said, “In this situation the priest can be removed from ministry and left in limbo for many years."
Collins recognized that his situation must be difficult for the accused priests but said “some victims just cannot face what a trial would involve.”
34 Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Switch to the desktop site to post a comment.Mortimer74 | Dec 06, 2012, 11:34 AM EST
Just this last Monday in the US (Dec 3, 2012), SNAP National Director David Clohessy issued a media statement with the following headline: “Predator priest jailed again. SNAP responds.” It’s right there on their website. A "predator priest"? Arrested? Indeed, this would be shocking if it were true. But it isn't. In truth, Carlos Rene Rodriguez, who was arrested on Monday, has not acted as a priest for nearly two decades. The Church completely stripped him of his faculties in 1993. That same year, Rodriguez tried to return to ministry, but the Church denied him. The Church officially laicized him in 1998. In other words, Rodriguez is far from being a "predator priest." He is merely a private citizen. As with any lay person, the Church has no control over his personal activities whatsoever. Actually, Clohessy should know that Carlos Rodriguez was no longer a priest from an LA Times report on his trial in September 2002. That report is featured on SNAP's own website. The headline reads "2 Ex-Priests Charged in Molestations" and the report states, "Rodriguez, who resigned from the priesthood in 1993." He is also referred to as a "former priest." SNAP's headline and story are completely false. Either SNAP knew this, and it deliberately deceived people, or it chose not to take a measly 20 seconds to learn the easily verifiable facts of the matter.
eiriamach | Dec 06, 2012, 11:18 AM EST
What does it say about the character of someone who will not trust the process of investigation and court trial to vindicate the names of falsely accused priests?
seamus60 | Dec 06, 2012, 10:40 AM EST
Smyrnian. Agree with you. The Church has a serious hand in this as well, in that had they been prepared to deal with the issue in an open and transparent manner from the start the people would have a lot less reason to be suspicious when ever a new accusation is made.
Smyrnian | Dec 05, 2012, 06:57 PM EST
It must be a horrible feeling to be accused of something and not be allowed to know who the accuser is or have the ability to challenge that person. Sit back and watch your life, your career and your reputation be destroyed. Nothing can be right about that.
Mortimer74 | Dec 05, 2012, 02:06 PM EST
The Abuse Plague is Universal "But the facts—and the selective way they are dealt with in too much of the mainstream media—do suggest that the story line declaring the Catholic Church a uniquely perverse institution is a lie; those who perpetrate it are either ignorant bigots, or people with agendas other than the protection of young people, or both." (George Weigel, firstthings website, Dec 5th 2012) (George Weigel is Distinguished Senior Fellow of the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, D.C.)
Mortimer74 | Dec 05, 2012, 11:39 AM EST
Yes, misneac, the Truth Abuse Scandal has indeed been a very lucrative business. In fact it has been operated by a cozy cartel of controversial and unethical lawyers and certain (though not all) “victims support” groups, with the secular liberal media all too happy to disseminate often flawed, distorted and inaccurate information to keep the ball rolling and the cash registers ringing. Again, simply google david rose daily mail st williams to read all about it.
seamus60 | Dec 05, 2012, 08:37 AM EST
As an out and out supporter of clergy victims I think it only fair that anyone accused of such vile acts is allowed to know by whom at the earlist stage possable.
seamus60 | Dec 04, 2012, 10:54 PM EST
another catholic trick blocking the abused from testifying against the abusers. They remind me of the priests who helped the nazi in Germany. All religions started as cults still are cults. All religions should be taxed just like any other business.
misneac | Dec 04, 2012, 08:17 PM EST
The "abuse " industry has been lucrative !The Priests should now actively challenge their accusers in Court and claim civil damages for defamation of character !
eiriamach | Dec 04, 2012, 08:12 PM EST
kaydog writes, "to let them accuse in secret smacks of the old midaevil [sic] practice of anonymous accusations of witchcraft." They do not "accuse in secret." The media do not publish their names; their privacy and security are protected from individuals who might dissuade them, one way or another, from testifying in court. To publicize the names of alleged sexual abuse victims, especially children, "smacks of" ancient tribal religions whose priests demanded that parents offer their firstborn children as sacrifices to appease the gods, made angry by the sins of the community. (See Exodus 22:29-30.) I wouldn't expect Irish parents to sacrifice their children's privacy and security anytime soon, not given their reactions to the horrendous, decades-long sexual abuse scandals. This proposal by the ACP must fail. I hope they succeed, however, in changing the way the bishops handle suspensions after accusations.
eiriamach | Dec 04, 2012, 08:12 PM EST
Misneac, please do check out the Daily Mail report I mention below. You'll read how the police in England are going after the liars. It's a superb piece of investigative journalism.
Mortimer74 | Dec 04, 2012, 07:56 PM EST
kaydog1, those are certainly among the major contributory factors to false accusations. There is another which professionals in the field of cognitive psychology are all too familiar with. It is under-reported because it is painful, and often inconvenient for people to admit. Unfortunately, for people who feel they have failed or been denied in life, there is a compelling urge to project blame onto others. They require little prompting to scapegoat somebody else - or an organization. By reframing themselves as a victim they feel somehow exonerated, and alleviated of fault or blame. Further, they are embraced by other "victims" and their communities, they are made welcome by "victims groups." And they can even receive large monetary benefits, just for telling their "story." What's more, nobody is going to probe them, and they can remain anonymous. They have nothing to lose. And everything to gain. It is not difficult to see how memories can suddenly "resurface." Priests and other innocent victims of false allegations need to be protected from this psychopathy, just as children need to be protected from potential abusers.
Mortimer74 | Dec 04, 2012, 07:45 PM EST
The "sexual abuse " industry is a a very lucrative one ! It is time the Catholic Church started chall challenging these allegations and stop paying out compensation to all and sundry who shout "abuse " .The Priests should be more legally active against these chancers !
eiriamach | Dec 04, 2012, 07:32 PM EST
"Innocent until proven guilty" does NOT mean that the accused has the right to protect his good name by cover-up, transfer to another parish, shredding of incriminating documents such as payments for silence, refusing to give evidence to police, or other protections bishops are expert in providing. "Innocent until proven guilty" pertains specifically to full, unimpaired investigation by law enforcement officers and, when warranted by the evidence, trial by jury. That's what "proof" of guilty or not-guilty means! In order to protect that process, the accuser in a sexual abuse case must be safe from intimidation and humiliation by publicity, smears in the media, bribery attempts, etc. Priests are denied NO requirements of due process or justice. A falsely accused priest has recourse to law after the evidence is in hand and the jury has spoken. When the right to a 'good name' precludes the process due to victims, we do not have equal justice, and the canon law that pretends to value the reputation of the accused equally with justice for the accuser is a sham, a pious pretense for cover-ups.
kaydog1 | Dec 04, 2012, 07:25 PM EST
One should ALWAYS have a right to face one's accusers. It is only in Ireland's kangaroo courts that the accusers may keep their identities secret, while smearing the reputations and good name of individuals DECADES after an alleged event. People will tell lies for all sorts of reasons, folks. Sometimes they are Delusional, sometimes they are hoping to extort money, sometimes they are Sociopaths, sometimes they just plain-old hate Catholics. It is NEVER proper to simply accept the word of an accuser uncritically, and to let them accuse in secret smacks of the old midaevil practice of anonymous accusations of witchcraft - there simply is no Justice in it!
eiriamach | Dec 04, 2012, 07:15 PM EST
Doctor McHugh's experience with sexual abuse victims and her expertise are invaluable, and Irish Central is fortunate to have her comments. On the other hand, what has Mortimer74 *contributed* besides complaints, irrelevancies (like the tu quoque fallacies of logic at Dec 04, 2012, 06:18 PM EST), distortions, and peevishness?
eiriamach | Dec 04, 2012, 07:14 PM EST
It is far from a "universally hated" idea. Innocent until proven guilty. Right to a fair trial. Prison sentences for false accusers. Right to confront your accuser. These are universally endorsed ideas. Unfortunately, priests are denied them. Enlightened readers may care to search Daily Mail David Rose St Williams for an excellent piece of investigative journalism in the area of false accusers and unethical lawyers. I have been trying to share that with readers of IC since yesterday.
eiriamach | Dec 04, 2012, 06:55 PM EST
I am shocked that the ACP of Ireland would hatch such an obviously harmful, universally hated idea! This is from an American web site 'Media Communication Law: Exam 2," but the part concerning ethics for journalists has a nearly universal scope. "What do the following cases-- Cox Broadcasting v. Cohn, Florida Star v. BJF, and Florida v. Globe-- have in common? Answer: They held that naming of rape victims in news reports violates the 4th Amendment [US Constitution, right to security of person]. Courts ruled that there is no First Amendment ["freedom of speech"] right to name rape victims. They ruled that 1st Amendment does not ban publication of the names of rape victims; it is a matter of journalistic ethics." The US Constitution also protects an accused person's right to confront and question his or her accuser, but this right pertains to a fair trial in criminal court. I understand that accused priests suffer loss of reputation or 'good name' when an accusation is made. But JUSTICE requires not jeopardizing investigation or trial by naming victims. The priests cannot hope to succeed in this not-at-all-'liberal' cause.
Mortimer74 | Dec 04, 2012, 06:18 PM EST
Dr Rosemary Eileen McHugh, Chicago, Illinois: have you reported your case of sexual abuse? In writing? I read your comments closely, then did some research on you. And I uncovered phrases from you like, “I pray that the Vatican will lose its power.” I wonder if you harbor an agenda here. I’m interested to know if you also treat victims of child sexual abuse from other denominations (you see, they’re actually more numerous than within the Catholic Church). Perhaps you’ve treated children who have been abused in US public schools. The author of a 2004 report commissioned by the US Department of Education, Hofstra University’s Charol Shakeshaft, said, “The physical sexual abuse of students in schools is likely more than 100 times the abuse by priests.” Unfortunately, Rosemary, you don’t seem to mention those. By the way, there are lots of statistics from reputable bodies out there now showing that incidences of Catholic clergy abuse have fallen off dramatically. Last year there were 7 credible accusations. Yes, 7. “Because of this shame and secrecy, we do not know how many priest sex abuse cases there really are,” you write in a post. Surely, such speculation doesn’t really move us forward much. Oh, and by the way, Dr McHugh, many priests have also committed suicide because of the emotional torture of false accusations. They are also victims
anglo-norman | Dec 04, 2012, 05:48 PM EST
Bill Donohue lol
Mortimer74 | Dec 04, 2012, 05:39 PM EST
- It has been estimated that in the US between 32% and 50% of all accusations against priests are either flat out false or grossly exaggerated (“Catholic Priests Falsely Accused,” author David Pierre). That is the real scandal in all this – the truth abuse scandal. The witch hunt, smear campaign and conspiracy of the last decade have left many completely innocent priests in ruins, and many disgusting individuals (liars, criminal fraudsters and unscrupulous lawyers) very wealthy. Over the past three years alone, 173 false accusations have been lodged against Catholic priests in the US. (Bill Donohue, The Catholic League, “Bigotry Explains False Accusations” (July 18, 2012)). Even in 2002, at the height of abuse reporting by media, a study found that approximately half of the priests accused between 1950 and 2002 were found to be subject to unsubstantiated allegations. (John Jay College of Criminal Justice, 2004 report). Embarrassingly for Ireland, an account like the widely debunked “Kathy’s Story” was taken at face value by 400,000 rather gullible individuals. There is a heinous double standard being applied to those like priests accused of sexual abuse. They are assumed guilty until proven innocent and are afforded no right to face or even know of their accusers. That merely encourages the liars and fraudsters. The ACP are quite right to request that their accusers be named, and their accusations put in writing.
anglo-norman | Dec 04, 2012, 05:12 PM EST
What a piece of work that corporation is...
The Commentator | Dec 04, 2012, 04:40 PM EST
Mortimer, I am not disagreeing that some priests have taken lie detector tests, what I am saying is all the priests and church hierarchy should take lie detector tests to verify the extent of their participation, rape, knowledge of or cover up. Only after all have participated , the guilty parties excommunicated, and the results publicized will anyone trust the Catholic Church. We are aware that not all priests are pedophiles, but the trick is knowing who are. Annual lie detector tests should be mandatory for the Catholic Church hierarchy and any people in positions of authority that have contact with children as part of their job or volunteer activity. I know all pedophile activity cannot be prevented, but eliminating many opportunities will lessen the frequency of incidents. I know I will feel better if my children, grandchildren, nieces, nephews etc. could be safe at church, sports and youth group activities.
Smyrnian | Dec 04, 2012, 04:11 PM EST
If I were in their place I would want to know who my accuser was. Anonymous accusations are clearly very unsettling to say the least.
Mortimer74 | Dec 04, 2012, 04:05 PM EST
commentator, I've already replied to you on lie detector tests. "If you do a little research, you’ll find that many accused priests over the last decade have willingly submitted to lie detector tests and passed them. Their accusers, meanwhile, have mysteriously shied away from them. Unfortunately, the results have not been allowed in the kangaroo courts."
Mortimer74 | Dec 04, 2012, 04:01 PM EST
irishpjk, yes, IC is filtering commentary about the Truth Abuse Scandal. It has blocked several comments I have made on the issue, some of which refer to important articles in other less agenda-driven media.
Searlit | Dec 04, 2012, 03:47 PM EST
Don't let them do this. There have been too many who have gotten away with this crime for too long.
The Commentator | Dec 04, 2012, 01:50 PM EST
WHEN IS THE CATHOLIC CHURCH HIERARCHY GOING TO UNDERGO LIE DETECTOR TESTS TO DETERMINE WHO RAPED THE CHILDREN, WHO KNEW ABOUT IT AND WHO COVERED IT UP. WHEN THE RESULTS ARE PUBLICIZED, THEN MANY MORE OF THE ACCUSERS MIGHT BE WILLING TO GO PUBLIC. This request by the priests seems to be a fishing expedition to find out how much longer they can lie about the abuse. If they can determine who is accusing them, then they can feel safe about children they raped who have not come forward. IF THE PRIESTS PROVIDE THE NAMES OF ALL THE CHILDREN THEY RAPED AND ABUSED TO THE POLICE AND ALSO CONFESS TO WITHHOLDING EVIDENCE OF CRIMES AND THE NAMES OF ALL THE CATHOLIC HIERARCHY WHO WERE AWARE OF THE ABUSE THEN THERE WOULD BE PROGRESS TOWARD JUSTICE, BUT IT SEEMS IT IS STILL BUSINESS AS USUAL IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. HYPOCRITES ALL. WHAT A SIN THESE PRIESTS STILL A PART OF THE CHURCH. CONFESS YOUR SINS TO THE COURT AND BEG FORGIVENESS !!!
Porickseantuny | Dec 04, 2012, 01:22 PM EST
Nothing except application of the same concept endorsed in the U.S. Constitution. You have a right to confront your accuser.
irishpjk | Dec 04, 2012, 12:11 PM EST
where did my coments go? Are we only allowed to agree with what you you write, sad.
pilib04 | Dec 04, 2012, 11:46 AM EST
If the accused will learn the name of the accuser in the process of the investigation, why do they need to know from the getgo? Sounds like a form of intimidation.
irishpjk | Dec 04, 2012, 11:46 AM EST
wtf. Too many people are coming out of the woodwork thirty or forty year later and making accusations about being abused in some cases the accused abuser is dead and cannot defend him/herself. I have come to the conclusion that many lives are ruined by false accusations. In Doctor McHugh’s case if you were already young doctor you must have been old enough to know better and as an adult you had an obligation to come forward then and there to put a stop to that kind of abuse and protect the children from a person like that. If the accuser waits years and is an adult they should be named only the children should be protected.
DrMcHugh | Dec 04, 2012, 10:52 AM EST
I congratulate Marie Collins and the police for putting the needs of the victim first in cases of priest sexual abuse. I am a Catholic physician. I have met many who have been sexually abused by priests. I was sexually assaulted by a Carmelite priest when I was a young doctor in Dublin. Sexual abuse by a priest is very traumatic and guilt-centered. Many victims never get the courage to come forward. Some even commit suicide, because they have given up hope that their story will be believed. The betrayal of trust by a priest with a child is especially cruel and the damage can last a lifetime of not trusting anyone, since not even a priest can be trusted. I respect many things that the Association of Catholic Priests is doing to make the church accountable. As Prime Minister Enda Kenny has said, the protection of the children must be the main priority. I would add, that all victims of priest sexual abuse must have priority over the priests' desire not to be known from the beginning. Sincerely, Dr Rosemary Eileen McHugh, Chicago, Illinois
Paradigm | Dec 04, 2012, 08:53 AM EST
Sounds to me like preparation for another Inquisition. Shameful!