The following stories were emailed to me by SNAP’s Peter Isely.
Thanks, Peter.
* * *
A few stories grabbed from the last day or so…Peter
Manhattan 
Papal Visit 2008: Clergy Sex Abuse Victims Protest For More Legal Punishment Of Abusers
April 18, 2008
Clergy sex abuse victims gathered outside St. Patrick’s Cathedral Friday, warning Catholics to stay vigilant about reporting abuse cases.
Representatives from the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, or SNAP, said the sexual abuse crisis in the Catholic Church is not over.
They feared Thursday’s meeting between victims and the Pope will give Catholics a false sense of security.
“We’re here today to implore the pope to force bishops here in the US to send any priest who has abused a child to law enforcement and to make sure that any bishop who covers up for sexual abuse is reprimand and removed,” said Joelle Casteix, regional director of SNAP Southwest.
The group called the Pope’s recognition of the abuse a step forward, but said more needs to be done.
“We think yesterday’s meeting with victims and the Pope gives a green light to Catholics in the United States and around the world to start coming forward and reporting crimes against children,” said Peter Isley, a SNAP National Board member. “Anything that they know about theses crimes. We think it’s letting Catholics know that their pope is now telling them, -this is real.”
SNAP also suggests their members speak at church gatherings to share tips and signs to keep children from being abused.
Abuse Victims Warily Consider Pope’s Words
By RICHARD G. JONES and ABBY GOODNOUGH
Published: April 18, 2008
Jim Hackett waited 30 years before going public in 2005 with his horrific account of being sexually abused by a priest who eventually admitted that he groped adolescent boys. The priest was placed on leave, yet found a way to continue as a clergyman.
Skip to next paragraph
Enlarge This Image
Todd Heisler/The New York Times
Tim Echausse, director of the Long Island chapter of the Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests, said the pope deserved credit for raising the issue of sexual abuse.
Enlarge This Image
Brendan Smialowski for The New York Times
Becky Ianni, also a victim, said the visit reminded her of her alienation from her religion: “It’s just so glaring because everyone is so excited. I wish I could be excited.”
As Mr. Hackett anticipated Pope Benedict XVI’s first visit to the United States this week, he waited for an indication that the church would do more to help abuse victims like him and to punish their abusers. And after the pope’s surprise visit with a group of victims in Washington on Thursday, Mr. Hackett is still waiting for Benedict to publicly articulate specific steps the church will take to help prevent others from suffering the way he did.
“It’s all just window dressing,” said Mr. Hackett, 44, a computer programmer who lives in Cheshire, Conn. “You have to look at his actions. He was pressured into doing something.”
As the pope arrives in New York City on Friday, Mr. Hackett and other abuse victims will stage a vigil outside a SoHo art gallery displaying a new exhibit of photographs of them. While Benedict addresses the United Nations on Friday, Robert Costello, who said he was abused by a priest in West Roxbury, Mass., starting at age 10, plans to read aloud the names of victims.
Mr. Costello, who is 46 and lives in Norwood, Mass., questioned why Thursday’s meeting was with only a handful of victims and why it was not publicized ahead of time.
“I think it’s very nice for those five victims, if they found healing or encouragement,” he said. “But for the rest of the survivors, one of the first questions is, ‘Why wasn’t it me?’ ”
Few have greeted Benedict’s arrival with as much ambivalence as the victims of the priest sexual abuse scandal, which sent tremors through across the United States six years ago, with aftershocks still resonating.
Some victims, like Mr. Hackett, have largely ignored the pope’s visit and say they are dubious about his public pronouncements about how deeply he has been affected by the crisis, even questioning the motives behind his meeting on Thursday. Others have struck a more conciliatory tone, saying that Benedict should be credited for addressing the scandal far more directly than others in the church hierarchy.
“I’m disappointed, but I also have to give Benedict his due,” said Tim Echausse, director of the Long Island chapter of the Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests, a national victims group.
Almost all say that more important than the pope’s words are his actions, criticizing what they say is the lack of a concrete plan to purge pedophiles from the church and discipline bishops and other leaders who have protected them.
“It’s a small but overdue positive step if it leads to action,” David Clohessy, a leader of the survivors network, said of the private meeting with five victims from the Boston area on Thursday. “Talk can produce change or complacency.
“Despite the soothing words and promises of reform,” Mr. Clohessy added, “the cold, hard fact is that not a single kid is safer today because of what’s been said this week.”
Mr. Clohessy says new cases of abuse by priests still are being reported regularly, despite the no-tolerance decree issued by the United States Conference of Bishops in Dallas in 2002. “They don’t have to live up to their principles because no one is able to sanction them,” Mr. Clohessy said of the bishops.
No one, that is, except for Benedict, whose public comments about the scandal have focused more on his personal perspective of the crisis than a specific plan to address it. In interviews this week, several victims of abuse said they hoped that he would go further than such pronouncements.
“He’s been so troubled by this? I feel for him deeply,” another victim, Patricia Anne Cahill, 55, said sarcastically of the sentiment the pope has repeated several times during his visit this week. “Let him have lunch with some of us. He’ll see what being troubled is like.”
After Thursday’s meeting, Ms. Cahill said: “The question I have is: How were they chosen? Why wasn’t it put out there as a random sampling? Maybe they’re saying what the church wants to hear and what the public wants to hear.”
Ms. Cahill, who said that her uncle repeatedly raped her during her childhood, invoking his priest’s collar as a way to keep her silent, is also among the 30 victims featured in the exhibit of photographs in SoHo, titled “Crosses,” by Carmine Galasso, a photojournalist at The Record of Hackensack, N.J.
Enlarge This Image
Christopher Capozziello for The New York Times
Jim Hackett, who was sexually abused by a priest as a child, said he wanted specific steps taken to prevent such abuse, not just expressions of regret from the pope.
The exhibit, and a book by the same name, includes haunting portraits of victims returning to the churches, rectories and other locations where they said they were abused.
“I’m not a holy roller; I don’t really practice my faith,” said Mr. Galasso, who grew up Catholic. “But if you’re born a Catholic, you’re Catholic. And this was something that spoke to me professionally and personally.”
Several of the victims in the photographs, as well as others around the country, awaited the pope’s visit with deep ambivalence — and reacted with deep suspicion to his meeting with victims. Susan Renehan, 59, who said she was sexually abused by a priest for a number of years as a child in New Jersey, questioned whether an honest dialogue took place.
“I’ve been in touch with many survivors over the years,” said Ms. Renehan, who is active in the New England chapter of the survivors network. “I can’t think of one who fits the criteria of being polite enough to meet with the pope.”
She went on: “The pope talks about how he feels ashamed and all of this.
“But we are plagued by lawyers working for the Vatican and for the church to make sure they fight tooth and nail to make sure, unless forced to, they don’t have to be responsible for what happened. It’s sort of a hypocritical conversation they have going. If you criticize it, they say, ‘She’s just angry.’ ”
Rodney Ford, whose son, Gregory, reached a settlement with the Archdiocese of Boston in 2004 relating to his abuse by the Rev. Paul Shanley from 1983 to 1989 at a church in Newton, Mass., said of the meeting: “I see this as him trying to raise money for the Catholic Church. It’s a political statement.”
Asked why he thought his son and others who have been harshly critical of church leaders had not been invited, Mr. Ford said: “They chose people who were going to be more appropriate.”
Mr. Hackett, who was one of 43 abuse victims to share $22 million as part of an agreement to settle abuse claims with the Archdiocese of Hartford, was similarly suspicious of Benedict’s public pronouncements about the sex abuse scandal this week.
“He has a history of pooh-poohing it — now he’s taking a whole different line,” said Mr. Hackett, who has distanced himself from the church. “I wonder about the change of heart. He probably realizes that a lot of people are walking away from the church. Now, he’s just trying to stop the bleeding.”
For victims who have struggled to reconcile with the church, the pope’s visit can be particularly painful. “To me, the pope points out that I don’t have a church,” said Becky Ianni, 50, a sex abuse victim and a mother of four who lives in Virginia. “It reminds me that there is an empty spot. It’s just so glaring because everyone is so excited. I wish I could be excited.”
URL: http://www.newsweek.com/id/132761
Sponsored By
‘Empty Promises’
The pope needs to punish church leaders who fail to act against abusive priests, says a survivor.
Daniel Stone
Newsweek Web Exclusive
Updated: 6:07 PM ET Apr 18, 2008
On Thursday afternoon, after celebrating mass with 46,000 Roman Catholics in Washington, D.C., Pope Benedict XVI made an unannounced stop. He returned to the papal nunciature at the Vatican Embassy where he met with six victims of clergy sexual abuse. It was the fourth time this week he explicitly confronted the sexual abuse that rocked the American church, starting in Boston in 2002.
Benedict was joined in the private meeting by Cardinal Sean O’Malley, who took over the Boston diocese after Cardinal Bernard Law was forced to step down after he came under attack for mishandling abuse cases in his diocese. The message the pontiff delivered was described by people there as one of hope, during which the survivors aired their concerns, prayed with him and were reportedly seen in tears following the brief session.
Though the meeting was appreciated—even expected—by victims-rights groups, they say that Benedict’s approach to the issue thus far of the issue has been largely ceremonial. The pope, they say, has not done enough to offer concrete plans for how to effectively punish the perpetrators of abuse and the church officials that harbor them. Barbara Blaine, president of the Survivor’s Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAP), spoke with NEWSWEEK’s Daniel Stone about her group’s reaction to how Benedict has so far confronted the issue. Excerpts:
NEWSWEEK: What was your general reaction to him meeting with the victims of clergy abuse Thursday?
Barbara Blaine: We heard that was going to happen, so we weren’t surprised. But we think it would be far better if, rather than engage in political maneuvers, he would discipline the wrongdoers and thereby maybe protect children. We applaud the courage of those victims to speak up, and we think it takes courage—but it’s also extremely painful. What we’re hoping for is that the Holy Father would actually take some action.
What kinds of protections and policies are in place now?
The bishops have committed themselves to remove predators when allegations are made and the allegations seem credible. The problem is that we’re finding instances of predators being allowed to remain in ministry in spite of allegations. Another thing is that bishops failed to follow the system in which the National Review Board, which is affiliated with the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, evaluates each diocese annually to see how each diocese is doing. The dioceses have varied in how they’ve put into place policy provisions, and I think 11 or 12 of dioceses were found to not be in compliance. Of all places, the archdiocese of Boston was not in compliance with a provision that says how they’re supposed to protect the children and stay safe. And yet in spite of all that, the pope had [Cardinal] O’Malley yesterday at the meeting with the victims. Of all the places where you’d think they’d be bending over backward to protect children and ensure their safety, that’s a diocese where they’re found not to be in compliance. There are no consequences in place now for any bishop or church leader who fails to follow the policies. And we keep finding examples where they do violate policies. The policies are empty promises if there’re no consequences for those that don’t follow them.
So what changes would you support to address the lack of consequences?
We think the enablers—the church leaders who engage in the cover up and enabling of perpetrators—should be punished. Bishops or church leaders who are found to knowingly lead a cover-up should be fired. They shouldn’t be allowed to remain as bishops. The religious superiors around the world who are harboring fugitive priests and giving them sanctuary should be forced to resign, as well.
How could Benedict have approached the topic more effectively than he has thus far?
When the Holy Father met Wednesday night with the U.S. bishops, rather than congratulating them and telling them what a terrific job they’re doing, he should have singled out those with the most egregious track record and said how they should be punished. We believe that would have sent a chilling message, and then other church leaders would follow that directive.
How do you think the church can confront the issue of abuse before it becomes a problem, as opposed to punishing perpetrators and enablers after the abuse has already happened?
Well, the Catholic Church has always had pedophile priests and probably [always] will. The question is whether or not people who enable and cover up for them will be punished. That’s the crux of the problem. It’s not [for] the individual predators—they have a specific compulsion and addiction, and we know that deterrence doesn’t work for that kind of criminal. But deterrents do work for church supervisors and bishops.
The other thing is that the bishops have a policy in place with lofty words, but there are absolutely no consequences to those who don’t follow the policy, so it’s largely meaningless. So [the bishops] say that someone involved in abuse will never be allowed in ministry again, [but] we keep finding examples of how these predators are involved in ministries still. It’s comparable to the speed limit. If there are speed-limit signs on the highway but there’s never a police car giving a ticket, most citizens would never follow the speed limit. A policy has an impact if there’s a consequence for not following the rules.
What would be appropriate discipline?
Either firing or demoting or sanctioning them. [The pope] surely knows how to sanction them. Some of the commentators were saying “This is such a large maneuver for the Holy Father. He didn’t even have to say anything. This is sufficient.” And to that I would say ‘No, words aren’t enough. Nothing can restore our innocence or our childhood and that leaves us feeling helpless and hopeless.’ But what we’ve learned is that it becomes empowering for us if we can prevent others from being abused. So if the Holy Father wants to help us as victims, he needs to put in measures that actually protect kids.
When he addressed the issue this week, did the pope re-open the wounds for all the victims?
Well, at this moment, we’re inundated with many more calls from new victims and family members of victims. But we have an extensive network of survivors that knows how to handle the volume of new cases.
So since his message, as you say, was more ceremonial, would it have been better if he didn’t approach the topic at all?
He was forced to say something. If he’s going to come to America, he had to say something, but we’re hoping that he does more. He has the authority to act and make consequences and we’re still waiting for him to do that.
What about priests who oversaw cases that occurred decades ago? Should they receive punishment, which would include stripping them of their pensions?
We’re far less interested in punishing actions like that. We’re not a vengeful people. I don’t think any victims wish anything ill toward the individual predators. It’s not the individual predators. But church leaders enable them. That’s who we want to see punished. If you remove bishops from their Good start, but look for follow-through
By Margery Eagan | Friday, April 18, 2008 | http://www.bostonherald.com | Columnists
Photo by AP
“It was the right thing to do and it’s also brilliant public relations. The question is what was Benedict’s motive. I think we’ll know in time.”
So said church scandal expert Anne Barrett Doyle yesterday, expressing perfectly my own reaction yesterday to news that Pope Benedict XVI had met with a handful of Boston survivors.
How will we know the pope’s motivation? By his follow-through. Whether hearing survivors’ stories first-hand will cause him to act against those American bishops who allowed this to go on and on. Whether he’ll remove Bernard Cardinal Law from his position in Rome or John B. McCormack, bishop of Manchester, N.H., for the past 10 years.
At least two of the five survivors who met with the pope yesterday were victims of predator priest Joseph Birmingham, who molested dozens of young boys in the Boston area beginning in the 1960s and whose abuse, many Birmingham victims say, was not only known but covered up by McCormack.
Bernie McDaid, who met with the pope yesterday, was molested by Birmingham as an 11-year-old altar boy at St. James Church in Salem. Olan Horne, who met with the pope, was molested by Birmingham at St. Michael’s Church in Lowell.
Bishop McCormack went to seminary with Birmingham and lived in the rectory with him at the Salem church. That is where Paul Cultrera, the victim whose story is at the center of the scandal documentary “Hand of God,” said Birmingham began molesting him when he was a high school freshman.
That is where James Hogan described sexual abuse continuing over four years in the late 1960s when he was in grammar school at St. James parochial school. Hogan said Birmingham would call him out of class to molest him, or take him to his rectory bedroom. Hogan has also said repeatedly that he knows McCormack saw him there, and did nothing about it.
Anne Barrett Doyle works for Bishop-Accountability.org, the most comprehensive Web site documenting the church scandal in Boston and around the country.
If you visit it, you can read survivors’ accounts of what hundreds of priests, and many bishops, did to them when they were 8, 10, 12 years old. You can read about mothers calling the rectory – even traveling to the old chancery in Brighton to meet with McCormack himself, who later became a top Law aide, to report abusive priests to him.
In their the-church-is-all-powerful naivete, these mothers expected McCormack to do something. They expected him to call police. They expected the abusers to get arrested, go to jail.
You can read a letter one frantic father wrote to McCormack asking if he should fear that his son, too, was a victim of Birmingham. No, no, came McCormack’s reply. Don’t worry.
You can read the survivors’ own words about running from the room after this priest or that priest molested them. They were scared and crying but too petrified to tell. So they kept their secrets for years.
When you read all this, you understand that listening to victims, as Benedict did yesterday, is good and right and an excellent start, but it is only a start. To fix the Catholic Church in Boston, those who knew what happened and kept silent must now pay a steep price.
Pope Benedict heads a church that is supposed to be about doing what is right, even if it’s difficult, especially if it’s difficult.
Perhaps now, after hearing what he heard yesterday, he will begin, finally, to do it.
Margery Eagan’s radio show airs on 96.9 WTKK.
Article URL: http://www.bostonherald.com/news/opinion/columnists/view.bg?articleid=1087956positions, we think the bishops would stop acting like that. That’s the real problem.
