Cardinal Seán O'Malley, archbishop of Boston

[Karlis]

Publicly posting names of priests accused of sexual abuse on the Boston Church website will have both supporters and critics. Supporters will applaud the publication of convicted child abusers, and critics may worry about the possibility of innocent people being accused and included in the listing.

Anyone choosing to post thoughts and comments regarding Cardinal Seán O'Malley's statement, please do so in context, and refrain from attacking the Church.

Karlis

-=-=-=-

BOSTON, AUG. 27, 2011 (Zenit.org).- Here is the text of a statement published Thursday by Cardinal Seán O'Malley, archbishop of Boston, regarding his decision to publish the names of clergy accused of sexually abusing a child.

* * *

My Dear Friends in Christ,

The Archdiocese of Boston's commitment and responsibility is to protect children and to ensure that the tragedy of sexual abuse is never repeated in the Church. Since the crisis erupted in 2002, we have endeavored to regain trust by addressing the needs of survivors and those who have suffered as a result of clergy sexual abuse, investigating and responding to all allegations of misconduct involving minors, removing abusive priests from active ministry consistent with our zero tolerance policy, and creating and maintaining safe environments for children in our churches and schools. Much has been accomplished in Boston since 2002, but our work in this area is continuing, and we will remain ever vigilant.

The Archdiocese is continually evaluating its policies and practices to ensure that our child protection and abuse prevention efforts are further strengthened....(snip) ...

Source

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

Brave man, the Church like to keep these things in house (for whatever reasons).

[Guest]

Brave man, the Church like to keep these things in house (for whatever reasons).

Maybe because the Pope is........

Br Cornelius

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

Maybe because the Pope is........

Br Cornelius

The Pope is Brother Cornelius? Nah, not enough hair.

Personally, and this is demonstrating my glorious nievity, I think there's a good portion of the "keep it in house" belief coming from the belief in redemption and forgiveness for sins and transgressions - "Do you honestly and truly renounce your evil ways?" "Yes" "okay then" that sort of thing.

[Guest]

The Pope is Brother Cornelius? Nah, not enough hair.

Personally, and this is demonstrating my glorious nievity, I think there's a good portion of the "keep it in house" belief coming from the belief in redemption and forgiveness for sins and transgressions - "Do you honestly and truly renounce your evil ways?" "Yes" "okay then" that sort of thing.

That's the story - but the reality is that the Pope and his department sanctioned moving pedo priests from one diocese to another (repeatedly) in order to cover up their crimes. They did little to contain these criminals as policy and certainly didn't do enough to understand and treat the perpetrators. Bare in mind that this was endemic within the priesthood and so those in positions of authority were guaranteed to have their own fair share of pedo's with a vested interest in keeping a lid on their own crimes.

I think the motives were somewhat other than you suggest, and I think that the crime of paedophilia is almost inevitable in a celibate priesthood(should I say a priesthood who are bared from expressing natural urges in a natural way). Publishing the names of the perp's is a nice first step - removing the bar on Priests marrying might just represent the cure.

Br Cornelius

Edited August 29, 2011 by Guest

[supervike]

Sorry Catholic leadership, you've drug your feet far too long on this issue. *Snip*

Too little, too late.

Edited August 29, 2011 by Karlis
Deleted non-relevant comments to OP

[Rafterman]

No dimishing this in any way, but I can't help but notice when I look at the list that a high percentage of these cases are years if not decades old.

In my little corner of Upstate New York I see, on average, at least 3 LOCAL stories on teachers and administrators that have been CONVICTED of such crimes each month. In fact, this has been a banner summer for such arrest and convictions. In late July we had 3 in one week.

But yet let a postive story about the Catholic Church get published in the paper and within minutes there are dozens of comments about priests diddling little boys and girls.

[supervike]

Sorry Karlis, I have to disagree with you. I was not attacking the church, I was pointing the blame on the leadership of the church, which is vastly different.

I think it's a bit unfair to cut out my thoughts on the matter.

If we start 'snipping' bits that are deemed not relevant to the OP, then there is alot of work to be done.

Edited August 29, 2011 by supervike

[supervike]

But, thought I better add, that there is no disrespect meant, Karlis. I understand your position.

Catholicism is the only relgion I've ever belonged to (not sure I still do though) and I have a lot of ties to it. The Archbishop is trying to get a fresh slate, and it's understandable, and frustrating on how it's being done.

Edited August 29, 2011 by supervike

[__Kratos__]

So this man is a cardinal... He's most likely in the past covered up these kinds of stories. This is just a stupid PR stunt by the church it seems. The church has done more to hide and cover up their pedophile ring then they've ever done to help the victims.

If any other organization was to have in a place a global child sex ring with protections to the pedophiles... Governments would be tearing them apart piece by piece and we'd see a small amount of justice for such sickening crimes. But because christians claim to be a religion, they're protected to fondle little boys in every country they can land a foot. Disgusting.

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

There are millions of Catholics around the world, tens of thousands of Priests. How many are paedophiles? A staggeringly small number. How many played the "lets cover our arses and shuffle these people around" game? A larger staggeringly small number.

It's like holding us all complicit in the Crusades and the Inquisition.

[Guest]

There are millions of Catholics around the world, tens of thousands of Priests. How many are paedophiles? A staggeringly small number. How many played the "lets cover our arses and shuffle these people around" game? A larger staggeringly small number.

It's like holding us all complicit in the Crusades and the Inquisition.

As an institution the Catholic Church inflicted horrendous abuse on many thousands of children in the care of orphanages, mental institutions and special schools throughout Ireland. It was the very marrow of how they operated here (and I do not think it was unusual). They made these institutions into slave labour camps and profited hugely from doing so. There is something fundamentally wrong with an organisation which turns institutions of care into places of abuse and murder (lots of children died in their care). The fact that they have since done everything in their power to conceal their historic crimes shows that there is almost no real remorse.

Catholics may be fine and upstanding people - but the church is a pit of corruption from which all right minded catholics should be demanding reform.

Br Cornelius

[Karlis]

Is anyone interested in commenting on, or addressing the points made in the OP article?

Karlis

[Purplos]

I highly disagree with posting the names of people ACCUSED of pedophilia. CONVICTED people, yes, but all accused are probably not guilty.

[getbehindmesatan]

i disagree with that aswell .

if they are guilty then send them to prison let them pay for their crime , get them help ,de-preist them yes

but whats the point of making it public ?

[__Kratos__]

Proof this is a PR stunt...

In 1992, he was assigned to Fall River, where the Rev. James R. Porter had been accused of molesting more than 100 minors. In 2002, he was transferred to Palm Beach, where two of his predecessors had been accused of abuse. A year later, he was named archbishop of Boston, where Cardinal Bernard F. Law had resigned over an abuse scandal that triggered a national crisis.

Source

O'Malley has been praised for how he has handled abuse scandals, apologizing, leading liturgical rituals, settling lawsuits and changing policies. He led three dioceses racked by scandal.

Source

---------

Any points he tries to make are null and void... He's just their clean up guy to polish their rep while they keep raping little boys.

And really, the church is just naming names here to save the rest of the snake. They gave up a handful of names in part of their global pedophile ring... In reality, it makes no difference because right now they're moving and supporting pedophiles who are preying on children as we speak.

Edited August 30, 2011 by __Kratos__

[Guest]

A FORMER Catholic priest in Queensland, Australia, went to confession more than 1,500 times to admit sexually abusing boys. He was told to go home and pray. In a 2003 affidavit, then 68-year-old Michael Joseph McArdle, who was jailed for six years in October of that year, claimed to have made confession about his paedophile activities to about 30 priests over a 25-year period.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2011/0901/1224303291837.html#.Tl7TJXEjcAA.facebook

[Karlis]

_Kratos_ , you are you making many assertions. What is your proof and evidence for those assertions? Please be specific.

I feel that in your post you are attempting to throw mud, and not telling us where that mud originates.

Proof this is a PR stunt...

In 1992, he was assigned to Fall River, where the Rev. James R. Porter had been accused of molesting more than 100 minors. In 2002, he was transferred to Palm Beach, where two of his predecessors had been accused of abuse. A year later, he was named archbishop of Boston, where Cardinal Bernard F. Law had resigned over an abuse scandal that triggered a national crisis.

Source

>>>>> _Kratos_ -- Would you care to explain how this source is "Proof this is a PR stunt..."? [Karlis]

O'Malley has been praised for how he has handled abuse scandals, apologizing, leading liturgical rituals, settling lawsuits and changing policies. He led three dioceses racked by scandal.

Source

>>>>> _Kratos_ -- Would you care to explain how this source is "Proof this is a PR stunt..."? [Karlis]

---------

Any points he tries to make are null and void...

>>>>> _Kratos_ -- Would you care to explain? [Karlis]

... He's just their clean up guy to polish their rep while they keep raping little boys.

>>>>> _Kratos_ -- Would you care to explain? [Karlis]

And really, the church is just naming names here to save the rest of the snake. They gave up a handful of names in part of their global pedophile ring...

>>>>> _Kratos_ , could you read the article in the OP, and let us know where you see proof of your statement, based on that article? [Karlis]

... In reality, it makes no difference because right now they're moving and supporting pedophiles who are preying on children as we speak.

>>>>> _Kratos_ , could you please provide sources for your claim here? [Karlis]

[conspiracybeliever]

I don't understand why the names aren't made public. Why is it different from any other crime? If a person is convicted of a crime it is made public. It does ruin lives. Why would we protect the worst? If their names aren't made public I think names of all convicted should kept from the public also.

[Karlis]

I don't understand why the names aren't made public.

Go to the article in the OP, and you will find a web-link naming Boston priests convicted of child molestation.

... Why is it different from any other crime? If a person is convicted of a crime it is made public. It does ruin lives. Why would we protect the worst? If their names aren't made public I think names of all convicted should kept from the public also.

Where divulging the name of a perpetrator could harm a child, courts prohibit those names being made public -- *to protect the child*.

[__Kratos__]

_Kratos_ , you are you making many assertions. What is your proof and evidence for those assertions? Please be specific.

I feel that in your post you are attempting to throw mud, and not telling us where that mud originates.

He's been moved from abuse area to the next to clean up their mess and to smooth things over as I posted. Read my post once? It says he met with victims, settled lawsuits, etc. This means nothing to me because he's just their clean up guy they turn to when they're in need to look good.

Based on that article alone he acknowledges the cover up from that one church. Maybe read your own article next time... Also I'm pointing out that this church isn't alone in the cover up. Just cause they brought this guy in to clean up the image doesn't mean that the church's network of child abusers has stopped. The church is the one moving these sickos from church to church when they're found out they rape little boys. Giving up a few names on a website means next to nothing... While the church it's self is still covering up for the rest of their child abusers in their pedophile ring by withholding information to governments, law enforcement, the public and even victims.

Now if the article was about the pope doing all this on a complete network scale of rooting out and exposing all their pedophiles then I might be more inclined to be impressed. But here you just have a pr stunt to smooth over the public after yet more priests raped young boys.

In addition to cases of abuse, much of the scandal has focused around members of the Catholic hierarchy who did not report abuse allegations to the civil authorities. In many cases they reassigned those accused to other locations where they continued to have contact with minors.[3]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_sex_abuse_cases

The entire reason this man is speaking about child abuse and kiddie rapists is because of what I'm saying.

Edited September 2, 2011 by __Kratos__

[Karlis]

He's been moved from abuse area to the next to clean up their mess and to smooth things over as I posted. Read my post once? It says he met with victims, settled lawsuits, etc. This means nothing to me because he's just their clean up guy they turn to when they're in need to look good.

Based on that article alone he acknowledges the cover up from that one church. Maybe read your own article next time... Also I'm pointing out that this church isn't alone in the cover up. Just cause they brought this guy in to clean up the image doesn't mean that the church's network of child abusers has stopped. The church is the one moving these sickos from church to church when they're found out they rape little boys. Giving up a few names on a website means next to nothing... While the church it's self is still covering up for the rest of their child abusers in their pedophile ring by withholding information to governments, law enforcement, the public and even victims.

Now if the article was about the pope doing all this on a complete network scale of rooting out and exposing all their pedophiles then I might be more inclined to be impressed. But here you just have a pr stunt to smooth over the public after yet more priests raped young boys.

http://en.wikipedia....sex_abuse_cases

The entire reason this man is speaking about child abuse and kiddie rapists is because of what I'm saying.

_Kratos_, going by your following statement:

"... The church is the one moving these sickos from church to church when they're found out they rape little boys. Giving up a few names on a website means next to nothing... While the church it's self is still covering up for the rest of their child abusers in their pedophile ring by withholding information to governments, law enforcement, the public and even victims. ..."

I can see that you find it impossible to accept the clear facts that -- since 2002 -- the following inceptions are genuine reforms within the Archdiocese of Boston.

EXCERPTS from two paragraphs from the OP article:

... Since 2002, the Archdiocese has had in place a vigorous policy with respect to disclosing information about clergy accused of abusing minors. First and foremost, it is the policy of the Archdiocese to immediately report to law enforcement all allegations of clergy sexual abuse of children. These notifications are made to local District Attorneys' offices, the Massachusetts Attorney General, and, when appropriate, federal law enforcement. These notifications are made whether or not the person reporting the abuse is still a minor, whether or not the accused cleric is still alive, and whether or not the allegations have been evaluated to have even the semblance of truth. Second, the Archdiocese publicly discloses when a member of its clergy is removed from active ministry pending an investigation into an allegation of child abuse. Finally, the Archdiocese publicly discloses when a member of its clergy is convicted of sexual abuse of a child as a result of a criminal process or when, after a canonical process, a member of the clergy is removed from the clerical state.

... In its 2004 report, the Archdiocese published information with respect to the number of religious order priests and priests from other dioceses who had been accused of abusing minors while serving within the Archdiocese. Archdiocesan policy is that, as soon as an accusation of misconduct is received against a religious order priest or a priest from a different diocese, we immediately notify law enforcement, as well as the superior of that order or the bishop of that diocese, and revoke the accused priest's faculties to minister within our Archdiocese. ...

_Kratos_ -- seemingly, your views are set in concrete, so it is probably pointless for us to continue this conversation.

Regards,

Karlis

PS: Please note that the information in the wiki link you provide is now out of date -- as it predates 2002 -- the year when reforms were implemented in the Boston Archdiocese.

K.

Edited September 2, 2011 by Karlis

[__Kratos__]

^ Because you're only talking about one single church in the network. It's the network of pedophiles and the people covering for them that's the problem.

One single church is using a pr stunt to go public with their records supposedly, while on a global scale the church has refused to help constantly and instead helping the pedophiles instead of the victims.

You want to point to this single church using a clean up guy as it's all rosey and perfect so it must be completely over. But it isn't. I'll only be happy when the pope is put on trial for crimes against humanity for his helping pedophiles.

Pope accused of ignoring pleas to stop priest who molested 200 deaf boys

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article7075237.ece

Pope 'obstructed' sex abuse inquiry

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/apr/24/children.childprotection

Pope Benedict accused of masterminding Catholic Church sex abuse cover-up

http://www.irishcentral.com/news/Pope-Benedict-accused-of-masterminding-Catholic-Church-sex-abuse-cover-up-91038229.html

You are right about one thing though... I am set in my ways... I am against pedophiles and people who help them. Shocking, I know but hey it's what, I as an atheist, believe that raping little boys is wrong.

[Karlis]

^ Because you're only talking about one single church in the network.

That's because the article was about events specifically in Boston.

It's the network of pedophiles and the people covering for them that's the problem.

If you are suggesting that "the network of pedophiles and the people covering for them" still exists and is still active, please feel free to provide source material.

One single church is using a pr stunt to go public with their records supposedly, while on a global scale the church has refused to help constantly and instead helping the pedophiles instead of the victims.

You want to point to this single church using a clean up guy as it's all rosey and perfect so it must be completely over. But it isn't. I'll only be happy when the pope is put on trial for crimes against humanity for his helping pedophiles.

_Kratos_ -- may I ask why you insist on concentrating on past evils, and ignoring the corrections of the evils that have been put into place since around AD 2002? Boston is one example of such corrections. Are you saying that Boston is an isolated exception?

_Kratos_, the following three websites provide information that preceded the "clean-up" instituted in 2002 by the Roman Church. To show you that, I'm inserting a short excerpt from those sites, under each URL:

Pope accused of ignoring pleas to stop priest who molested 200 deaf boys

http://www.timesonli...icle7075237.ece

Father Lawrence C. Murphy, ... from 1950 to 1974, ... allegedly molested scores of pupils, preying on his victims in their dormitories and on class trips.

But instead of being defrocked and the police called in, it is alleged that Father Murphy avoided justice and remained a member of the Church after a key intervention by the Pope — then known as Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. Murphy was quietly moved to the Diocese of Superior in northern Wisconsin in 1974 and spent his last 24 years working freely with children in parishes and schools. He died in 1998 at the age of 72, still a priest.

Pope 'obstructed' sex abuse inquiry

http://www.guardian....childprotection

Pope Benedict XVI faced claims last night (NB. This article was published Sunday 24 April 2005) he had 'obstructed justice' after it emerged he issued an order ensuring the church's investigations into child sex abuse claims be carried out in secret. The order was made in a confidential letter, ... which was sent to every Catholic bishop in May 2001.

Pope Benedict accused of masterminding Catholic Church sex abuse cover-up

http://www.irishcent...p-91038229.html

"There is no denying the fact that the worldwide system of covering up cases of sexual crimes committed by clerics was engineered by the Roman Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith under Cardinal Ratzinger (1981-2005)," he said.

"During the reign of Pope John Paul II, that Congregation had already taken charge of all such cases under oath of strictest silence. Ratzinger himself, on May 18th, 2001, sent a solemn document to all the bishops dealing with severe crimes in which cases of abuse were sealed under the secretum pontificium, ...

You are right about one thing though... I am set in my ways... I am against pedophiles and people who help them. Shocking, I know but hey it's what, I as an atheist, believe that raping little boys is wrong.

Yes, that makes two of us who are against paedophiles and people who help them, _Kratos_. The difference between us seems to be that I *think* that the Catholic Church has taken steps to change those practices. As to whether the Pope should be made to answer for his actions, and/or lack of actions prior to the reforms, in my opinion is another question for another topic.

Regards,

Karlis

[Guest]

It is far from been all in the past - it is the ongoing reality;

http://www.michaelnugent.com/2011/07/20/bishop-magee-lied-and-deliberately-misled-says-cloyne-report/

The default position within the Catholic Church is still concealment - despite some new rules which claim the contrary.

The Buck stops with the Pope because he sets the tone, he has been in a high enough position of authority that if he was serious about the multiple cases of abuse which would have passed through his offices - he would have made significant inroads into stamping it out. He has failed.

Br Cornelius

Edited September 3, 2011 by Guest