A recent Panorama report 'Sex Crimes and the Vatican' incurred the complete condemnation of the Catholic press and Hierarchy in England and Wales. The alarming pattern of events which were revealed in the documentary were barely mentioned throughout the criticism which centred upon an anti-Catholic media agenda; real and imagined:
One of the few graces to have emerged from the scandal-stricken state of affairs within the Catholic Church has been a tendency for individual Catholics to rely on their own discernment.
Such an opportunity like no other has arisen in the wake of the Panorama report ‘Sex Crimes and the Vatican’ given the unflinching condemnation of the BBC on the part of the Catholic establishment whilst the average or ex-Churchgoer remains as disgusted with Church policy as ever.
Yet child abuse by the clergy goes back centuries and the widespread disclaimer amongst churchgoers that it's a recent phenomenom which "wasn't properly understood a couple of decades ago" has always failed to cut ice. The rape and molestation of children has been understood as wrong in itself by right-minded individuals throughout human history. Cardinal Newman (1801-1890) was fully aware of the nature of the 'problem' and the consequences of cover-up:
"Confess it now. Cry halt. Intervene and protect...do not sink deeper into a pit of degredation and horror by remaining silent and acquiescent. Your silence will make you an accessory to that unspeakable predation of God's little ones."
(cited in a letter to the Irish Sunday Independent - 6/1/05)
So what are today's catholics in the pew or the pub to make of yet another investigation into dereliction of duty on the part of the Vatican?
Well in many (but hardly all) cases you'll hear a very different interpretation to that conveyed via the Catholic bishops and newspaper editors.
A letter of complaint to the BBC from Cardinal Murphy O’Connor followed the Bishops’ denunciation of the documentary the day after its broadcast. The Cardinal intended to “…express the enormous distress and alarm of the Catholic community” and asserted that:
“The main focus of the programme is to seek to connect Pope Benedict with cover-up of child abuse in the Catholic Church. This is malicious and untrue and based on a false presentation of church documents.”
There was certainly an over-reliance on the once-secret 1962 decree Crimen Sollicitationis on the part of the Panorama team. Indeed the programme failed to establish a genuine connection between a seemingly systematic strategy of moving known paedophiles from parish to parish throughout the Catholic world and the 1962 document.
If such a secret policy has ever been consigned to paper it has yet to emerge.
However the Archbishop of Birmingham’s statement goes further in its claim that Crimen Sollicitationis relates entirely to the Confessional and “…is not directly concerned with child abuse at all.” It is at this point that “false and entirely misleading” (ibid) assertions beg closer scrutiny.
For there are clear references in the decree to “external obscene acts with minors” and even “bestiality”. In defending the broadcast, presenter Colm O’Gorman remarked:
“Animals don’t go to confession. It’s about time the Church stopped trying to spin these issues.” (Irish Times: 3/10/06)
The documentary relied on the interpretation of former Vatican official and Canon Lawyer, Fr. Tom Doyle who referred to Crimen Sollicitationis as “an explicit written policy to cover-up cases of child sexual abuse by the clergy” and “indicative of a worldwide policy of absolute secrecy”.
Fr. Doyle’s assessment is all the more significant given his initial scepticism towards the relevance of the directive when it first emerged in the press during 2003:
“…we possibly have what some commentators have alleged, namely, a blueprint for cover-up. This is obviously a big ‘if’ which requires concrete proof”. (Observer: 17/8/03)
It is important to acknowledge that whilst the layers of secrecy which resonate from the text of Crimen Sollicitationis have doubtless perpetuated an ethos of cover-up; the original intention of the document was to facilitate, rather than obstruct the apprehension of offenders. The envisaged tribunals were certainly internal and there is nothing to induce victims to take their experiences to the criminal justice system.
Yet in theory, at least, Crimen Sollicitationis could have afforded victims and witnesses an opportunity to raise their grievances and concerns without the daunting pressures which can prevent cases from ever being heard in public Courtrooms with the media in attendance.
The relationship between abuse victims and the media has always been one of interdependence and mutual cynicism. There are few court cases which would have got anywhere without press investigations which instilled the public awareness necessary for police investigations and church child protection measures to materialise.
An important criticism of this particular genre of investigative journalism (and Panorama, particularly) has been their pornographic approach to interviews with ex-victims. Perhaps a morbid minority exists amongst viewers that might genuinely dig displays of emotional torment but it's a form of voyeurism which may be far more repugnant than most producers tend to realise.
(I was interviewed for over an hour for the November 2000 edition of Panorama: 'Power to abuse'. Although every aspect of ex-victims' grievances within the Archdioces of Cardiff of the period was discussed about a minute was actually used which of course hovered around sacristy scenarios circa 1984-85.)
Whether Panorama were an influence, or otherwise, Cardinal Ratzinger issued a set of Vatican Norms a year later which according to Archbishop Nichols’ statement: “..does not hinder the investigation by civil authorities of allegations of child abuse”.
The guidelines are again in Latin and make no attempt to encourage victims to seek the criminal prosecution of their abusers. The main point which came across in the Panorama investigation was that the Catholic Church has no other child protection measures in place to protect the majority of its children throughout third world countries. If representatives from the U.S. legal system spoke of "unparallelled obstruction" from an organisation which "fought us every step of the way" then what chance the children of Brazil?
The same wretched scenarios of recent decades are simply being repeated in countries where less legal and media scrutiny exists: known abusers are moved to neighbouring parishes only to re-offend; victims and their families are vilified by “Christian” congregations for reporting a priest and no form of pastoral care or counselling, whatsoever, is made available to victims.
It is utterly abhorrent that the Catholic hierarchy of England and Wales have been unable to commend a documentary which has exposed the export of the Church’s worst sins to the third world.
And all the more sad given that the Archbishop of Birmingham has often been amongst the more dedicated and astute clergy to respond to the ‘clergy sex-abuse’ crisis.
Martin O’Shea
Author 'The Least Among Us'
Such an opportunity like no other has arisen in the wake of the Panorama report ‘Sex Crimes and the Vatican’ given the unflinching condemnation of the BBC on the part of the Catholic establishment whilst the average or ex-Churchgoer remains as disgusted with Church policy as ever.
Yet child abuse by the clergy goes back centuries and the widespread disclaimer amongst churchgoers that it's a recent phenomenom which "wasn't properly understood a couple of decades ago" has always failed to cut ice. The rape and molestation of children has been understood as wrong in itself by right-minded individuals throughout human history. Cardinal Newman (1801-1890) was fully aware of the nature of the 'problem' and the consequences of cover-up:
"Confess it now. Cry halt. Intervene and protect...do not sink deeper into a pit of degredation and horror by remaining silent and acquiescent. Your silence will make you an accessory to that unspeakable predation of God's little ones."
(cited in a letter to the Irish Sunday Independent - 6/1/05)
So what are today's catholics in the pew or the pub to make of yet another investigation into dereliction of duty on the part of the Vatican?
Well in many (but hardly all) cases you'll hear a very different interpretation to that conveyed via the Catholic bishops and newspaper editors.
A letter of complaint to the BBC from Cardinal Murphy O’Connor followed the Bishops’ denunciation of the documentary the day after its broadcast. The Cardinal intended to “…express the enormous distress and alarm of the Catholic community” and asserted that:
“The main focus of the programme is to seek to connect Pope Benedict with cover-up of child abuse in the Catholic Church. This is malicious and untrue and based on a false presentation of church documents.”
There was certainly an over-reliance on the once-secret 1962 decree Crimen Sollicitationis on the part of the Panorama team. Indeed the programme failed to establish a genuine connection between a seemingly systematic strategy of moving known paedophiles from parish to parish throughout the Catholic world and the 1962 document.
If such a secret policy has ever been consigned to paper it has yet to emerge.
However the Archbishop of Birmingham’s statement goes further in its claim that Crimen Sollicitationis relates entirely to the Confessional and “…is not directly concerned with child abuse at all.” It is at this point that “false and entirely misleading” (ibid) assertions beg closer scrutiny.
For there are clear references in the decree to “external obscene acts with minors” and even “bestiality”. In defending the broadcast, presenter Colm O’Gorman remarked:
“Animals don’t go to confession. It’s about time the Church stopped trying to spin these issues.” (Irish Times: 3/10/06)
The documentary relied on the interpretation of former Vatican official and Canon Lawyer, Fr. Tom Doyle who referred to Crimen Sollicitationis as “an explicit written policy to cover-up cases of child sexual abuse by the clergy” and “indicative of a worldwide policy of absolute secrecy”.
Fr. Doyle’s assessment is all the more significant given his initial scepticism towards the relevance of the directive when it first emerged in the press during 2003:
“…we possibly have what some commentators have alleged, namely, a blueprint for cover-up. This is obviously a big ‘if’ which requires concrete proof”. (Observer: 17/8/03)
It is important to acknowledge that whilst the layers of secrecy which resonate from the text of Crimen Sollicitationis have doubtless perpetuated an ethos of cover-up; the original intention of the document was to facilitate, rather than obstruct the apprehension of offenders. The envisaged tribunals were certainly internal and there is nothing to induce victims to take their experiences to the criminal justice system.
Yet in theory, at least, Crimen Sollicitationis could have afforded victims and witnesses an opportunity to raise their grievances and concerns without the daunting pressures which can prevent cases from ever being heard in public Courtrooms with the media in attendance.
The relationship between abuse victims and the media has always been one of interdependence and mutual cynicism. There are few court cases which would have got anywhere without press investigations which instilled the public awareness necessary for police investigations and church child protection measures to materialise.
An important criticism of this particular genre of investigative journalism (and Panorama, particularly) has been their pornographic approach to interviews with ex-victims. Perhaps a morbid minority exists amongst viewers that might genuinely dig displays of emotional torment but it's a form of voyeurism which may be far more repugnant than most producers tend to realise.
(I was interviewed for over an hour for the November 2000 edition of Panorama: 'Power to abuse'. Although every aspect of ex-victims' grievances within the Archdioces of Cardiff of the period was discussed about a minute was actually used which of course hovered around sacristy scenarios circa 1984-85.)
Whether Panorama were an influence, or otherwise, Cardinal Ratzinger issued a set of Vatican Norms a year later which according to Archbishop Nichols’ statement: “..does not hinder the investigation by civil authorities of allegations of child abuse”.
The guidelines are again in Latin and make no attempt to encourage victims to seek the criminal prosecution of their abusers. The main point which came across in the Panorama investigation was that the Catholic Church has no other child protection measures in place to protect the majority of its children throughout third world countries. If representatives from the U.S. legal system spoke of "unparallelled obstruction" from an organisation which "fought us every step of the way" then what chance the children of Brazil?
The same wretched scenarios of recent decades are simply being repeated in countries where less legal and media scrutiny exists: known abusers are moved to neighbouring parishes only to re-offend; victims and their families are vilified by “Christian” congregations for reporting a priest and no form of pastoral care or counselling, whatsoever, is made available to victims.
It is utterly abhorrent that the Catholic hierarchy of England and Wales have been unable to commend a documentary which has exposed the export of the Church’s worst sins to the third world.
And all the more sad given that the Archbishop of Birmingham has often been amongst the more dedicated and astute clergy to respond to the ‘clergy sex-abuse’ crisis.
Martin O’Shea
Author 'The Least Among Us'
Comments
Display the following comment