More than 500 priests accused of sexual abuse not yet publicly identified by Catholic Church, Illinois attorney general finds

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cathoholic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Cathoholic

Guest

More than 500 priests accused of sexual abuse not yet publicly identified by Catholic Church, Illinois attorney general finds​

Elvia Malagon Chicago Tribune 20 Dec 2018

A scathing report from Attorney General Lisa Madigan finds the number of Catholic priests accused of sexual abuse against children in Illinois is much higher than previously acknowledged.

The report said accusations have been leveled against 690 priests, while Catholic officials have publicly identified only 185 clergy with credible allegations against them. . . .

. . . “Clergy sexual abuse of minors in Illinois is significantly more extensive than the Illinois Dioceses previously reported,” it does not estimate how many of the allegations against the 690 clergy should have been deemed credible. . . .

. . . . In a prepared statement, Chicago Cardinal Blase Cupich acknowledged that victims of sexual abuse by Catholic priests continue to live with the pain. . .
Click to expand...
www.chicagotribune.com

More than 500 priests accused of sexual abuse not yet publicly identified by Catholic Church, Illinois attorney general finds

A scathing report from Attorney General Lisa Madigan finds the number of Catholic priests accused of sexual abuse against children in Illinois is much higher than previously acknowledged. The repor…
www.chicagotribune.com www.chicagotribune.com

.

This time for sure we are again told.
William Kunkel, the general counsel for the Archdiocese of Chicago, said he doesn’t anticipate the public list of Chicago-area priests with credible allegations of abuse to grow.
Click to expand...
From just two days ago we see this . . .

www.chicagotribune.com

18 Chicago-area Jesuit priests named in new list alleging sexual abuse

Eighteen Jesuit priests with ties to Chicago-area institutions were named on a list released Monday alleging instances of sexual abuse dating back more than six decades, including one defrocked pri…
www.chicagotribune.com www.chicagotribune.com

And last month this . . . .


And this is just concerning “minors”.

We ALSO need to be concerned for adults who are
victimized by the homosexuals who have been brought into the priesthood (or hetrosexuals).
Especially our vulnerable seminarians (as we saw with the ex-Cardinal McCarrick homosexual attacks upon our seminarians).
 
Last edited:
Are we now asking for all names, not just those who had credible allegations, but any priest who had an allegation made against him? Substantiated or not?

185 were named. There could be more, but is it right or just to publish names of men who have only been accused, but their accusations deemed not credible?

Where do we draw the line?
 
CilladeRoma . . .
Where do we draw the line?
Click to expand...
I think a good start would be if you tell the people you have exposed and reported to them ALL credible allegations, and then having it keep coming out that the Bishops have NOT done that, I think a good start would be being honest with the people in the first place.

And when Bishops have NOT been honest, admit it and BE honest.

Some of these diocesan reports clearly have been less than honest.

We need to strive for the transparency that Pope Francis has at least called for.

Regarding allegations that may not be credible, the Bishops will need to handle them on a case by case basis.

But the Bishops themselves, need cleaning up as we’ve seen with the Bishop McCarrick scandal. So part of the dilemma clearly lies at the feet of the Bishops who have been involved with these cover-ups.

Back after the crisis in 2002 the Bishops were asked WHY no accountabilty for them too. After all, if you are going to require fingerprinting of the lunch ladies, WHY NOT implement some accountibility for the bishops themselves.

Bishop Wilton Gregory’s response?

The people and the media will hold us accountable.

Likewise Pope Francis himself told the media to do your job. It will do you good.

Well now that the people and the media are holding them accountable (or trying to), it is inappropriate to demonize the people and the media.

After all. They are merely fulfilling the mandate that was asked of them by the hierarchy.

So I really don’t know the answer to your question. But I DO KNOW this call for more information now is not the fault of the innocent laity who have been victimized by half-truths and sometimes have had family members victimized by clergy themselves.
 
Last edited:
CilladeRoma said:
Where do we draw the line?
Click to expand...
I would say it is drawn with the Catholic Church. Anyone who is a priest is subject to being named for any allegation; substantial, credible, or frivolous. But I will wait and see what happens when someone outside of some state politician weighs in.
 
Last edited:
Evil tried to destroy the church. It failed. We are still here.
 
It is not for a Priest’s superior to decide if nothing happened, it is for a court of law
 
No, I did not misread your words.

The Canons on this issue are to be changed. Simply because they are wrong. If a person has an accusation against another, it is a criminal matter. No other body gets the right to dismiss the accusation. Holy Father Pope Francis issued a statement on the issue of abuse in the past 24 hrs.

You stated a Priests superior can decide if an allegation is credible. He can’t. It’s a criminal matter.
And quite fra the church needs to step back and allow justice to take its course. Then the Church steps in and sacks or reinstates as required

The change to these Canons was announced some time ago.
 
Last edited:
Roseeurekacross said:
You stated a Priests superior can decide if an allegation is credible. He can’t. It’s a criminal matter.
And quite fra the church needs to step back and allow justice to take its course. Then the Church steps in and sacks or reinstates as required
Click to expand...
The problem is that there is a double standard. The bishop in the diocese operates in accord to canon law and in accord with civil law. If he fails to report something that he is required to report by civil law, then he is criminally liable. The double standard is that district attorneys and AG’s will go after bishops, but not after other parties with more direct knowledge that could stop predators. How often did the bishop become directly aware by his own discover of sexual abuse, as opposed to some parent or other adult reporting it (to the Church and failing to report to the police)? Parents are not prosecuted for failure to report. For that matter, a blind eye is also turned to the victims, even the adults, who do not report for decades, allowing predatory behavior to continue. The best way to stop sexual abuse of children is to hold all accountable who fail to report (to the police, not the Church) sexual abuse.
 
Last edited:
@Hoosier_Daddy
see what I am talking about here.

Make the perpetrators responsible so the survivors don’t have to suffer absolute denial or accusations they are fabricating the whole thing.
 
Last edited:
The laws in your country also need to change, in this respect.
But as I keep saying, it shows an endemic sickness and depravity in society that only now, after decades of this , NO means NO. Lets look at every sector of society and purify it. How can we do that though.
Australia led the way a bit with the Royal Commission and in Criminally punishing these people regardless of rank, station, position.
Australia does hold all accountable. And yes, accountable to Police, not the church. I so agree.
 
If there is nothing wrong with Canon law in this regard, why is the Pope changing it? You may believe there is nothing wrong, however the Magisterium and many legal eagles do.

In this , our opinion does not count. And its so overdue to change laws that allowed this to happen, canonically.

Step into a Diocese that has dealt with this for a while now, get updated on whats actually going on and being done about this.
 
Roseeurekacross
NO means NO
Click to expand...
True enough Roseeurekacross.

I would add even “yes” means “no” even by secular standards, if it involves minors, people under your power (i.e. seminarians, etc.), people you give formal counsel to (Confessors and penitents, counselors and clients, psychiatrists and psychologists and their patients, a drunken victim, etc.), etc. etc.
 
Last edited:
Roseeurekacross said:
It is not for a Priest’s superior to decide if nothing happened, it is for a court of law
Click to expand...
Yes and no. It is the responsibility of the superior to investigate allegations against souls under their care.

It is also proper to follow mandated reporter laws and guidelines. In the USA this means reporting a suspicion, and allowing the investigative persons to substantiate or not. For children, this usually a child, youth, and family division of human services. These people are trained to interview potential victims. They generally work together with law enforcement detectives who have specialized training to investigate sexual abuse.

The court does not get involved until the end of the investigations.
 
Roseeurekacross said:
The Canons on this issue are to be changed. Simply because they are wrong.
Click to expand...
You know this because you have already instructed the ecclesiastical authorities and informed them it must be done?
Roseeurekacross said:
If a person has an accusation against another, it is a criminal matter.
Click to expand...
Not always.
Roseeurekacross said:
No other body gets the right to dismiss the accusation.
Click to expand...
The code calls for the allegation to be investigated exactly so that such accusations will not be “dismissed”.
Roseeurekacross said:
You stated a Priests superior can decide if an allegation is credible. He can’t. It’s a criminal matter.
Click to expand...
The two are not contradictory. A superior can still report an allegation to law enforcement, even if they do not believe it is credible.
Roseeurekacross said:
The change to these Canons was announced some time ago.
Click to expand...
By you? Or do you have another source?
 
Roseeurekacross said:
The laws in your country also need to change, in this respect.
Click to expand...
How so?
Roseeurekacross said:
accountable to Police, not the church
Click to expand...
You seem to think these two are mutually exclusive, but they are not.

And law enforcement acts to implement the civil standards, which is accountability to the people of society at large. There are two societies overlapping here. Those in the Church subject to canon law are also members of the wider society, and subject to civil law.
Roseeurekacross said:
If there is nothing wrong with Canon law in this regard, why is the Pope changing it? You may believe there is nothing wrong, however the Magisterium and many legal eagles do.
Click to expand...
I will wait to hear from you about the changes with a credible link/source.

I hope what will happen is a mandated reporting expectation being added. That does not mean anything will be subtracted.
Roseeurekacross said:
our opinion does not count
Click to expand...
Except yours?
 
How do I know the Canons are going to be changed in relation to this,

quite simply because Holy Father Pope Francis said so. Keep up with the latest coming out on the historic sex abuse crisis coming out of Rome

My opinion doesn’t count, neither do yours. The current actions and the historic inactions of those in power count

The experience and guidance and words of Bishops in Diocese where Cardinals are on trial, priests are jailed for life, survivors and their injustices remembered, are the only things that count.

This is and should be a matter for the criminal courts and not the Church to investigate. The church responds after the person has been found guilty or not. And that is how the Canons are being rewritten to reflect this.

Do a google search and find the relevant press releases from the Vatican, then talk to me.

I thank you both for your great tomes in reply , but really, until you are up to date with whats going on, and not just from a media and social media perspective, your knowledge is lacking.

Merry Christmas
 
Last edited:
Roseeurekacross said:
Australia does hold all accountable. And yes, accountable to Police, not the church. I so agree.
Click to expand...
This would not be the first time I agree with you, nor the first time Australia has been shown as having better ideas than others in the world. So… win?

I was thinking of a situation totally apart from religious context (from a legal standpoint). Take, for a example, the restroom at at a Coles (I had to look that one up). A kid gets molested and this is seen by a third party. Shocked, but stupid, he goes out and tells the first guy he sees, let’s say someone stacking up syrup. The employee goes to looks but everyone is gone. Now the police need to be called, but really, only one person has the firsthand knowledge required to help the police investigate, and it is the stocker just because he has a Coles pin on his shirt. Now if he is astute, there is helpful action he could take, but the largest burden has to be on the first hand witness.
 
Which is why the accused should never be named, if this is how we determine it.

If it is the court of law and not the Church who determines if anything happens, then until that has been decided, names cannot be given out, by definition.

If we are relying on courts of law.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top