The Catholic Church has not done enough to address the child abuse issue.

My church hierarchy(Catholic) still has not learned a lesson!

Irish abuse survivor Marie Collins has accused the Vatican bureaucracy of “shameful” resistance to fighting clerical sex abuse in the Catholic Church as she quit a key panel set up by Pope Francis.

In a major setback for the pope, Collins announced that she had resigned from the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors established by the pontiff in 2013 to counter abuse in the church. 

She said the pope’s decision to create the commission was a “sincere move” but there had been “constant setbacks” from officials within the Vatican.

“There are people in the Vatican who do not want to change or understand the need to change,” Collins said in a telephone interview from Dublin.

“I find it shameful,” Collins said. “The work we want to do is to make children and young adults now and in the future safer in the church environment from the horror of abuse.”

Collins was raped at age 13 by a hospital chaplain in Ireland  She was the only active abuse survivor on the Vatican panel since British survivor Peter Saunders was sidelined last year for his outspoken criticism. Saunders has not resigned or been formally dismissed.

The Catholic church is still telling newly appointed bishops that it is “not necessarily” their duty to report accusations of clerical child abuse and that only victims or their families should make the decision to report abuse to police.

A document that spells out how senior clergy members ought to deal with allegations of abuse, which was recently released by the Vatican, emphasized  bishops’ must be aware of local laws, but bishops’ only duty is to address such allegations internally. 

“According to the state of civil laws of each country where reporting is obligatory, it is not necessarily the duty of the bishop to report suspects to authorities, the police or state prosecutors the moment they are made aware of crimes or sinful deeds,” the training document states.  The training document also says little about preventing the problem in the future and it also downplay the seriousness of the Catholic church’s legacy of systemic child abuse, which some victims’ right groups say continues to be a problem today.

While acknowledging that “the church has been particularly affected by sexual crimes committed against children”, the training guide emphasizes statistics that show the vast majority of sexual assaults against children are committed within the family and by friends and neighbors, not other authority figures.  Why is this fact important to this commission or Catholics.  If one child is abused by a Catholic church official that is one too many and should be taken seriously by the hierarchy of the Catholic Church.  It seems to me they are more concerned that the sins of the church went public than the damage it did to children and families.

Pope Francis has called for the church to exhibit “zero tolerance” of sexual abuse of minors or vulnerable adults by clergy and that “everything possible must be done to rid the church of the scourge of the sexual abuse”.  It seems many in the hierarchy do not feel the same as the Pope.

SNAP, a US-based advocacy group for abuse victims that has been very critical of Pope Francis on the issue said, “It’s infuriating, and dangerous, that so many believe the myth that bishops are changing how they deal with abuse and that so little attention is paid when evidence to the contrary”.

The Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors, appointed by Pope Francis, played no role in the training program, even though it is Pope Francis Commission that is  supposed to be developing “best practices” to prevent and deal with clerical abuse.

The Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors (who should be the ones dealing with child abuse in the church) said their position is reporting abuse to civil authorities was a “moral obligation, whether the civil law requires it or not”. The official said the commission would be involved in future training efforts.

Keep in mind the abuse Pontifical Commission (the Popes Commission) forced one of two abuse survivors who had personally been appointed by Pope Francis to leave the committee following a vote of no confidence stating he released to much information to the public.  The other abuse victim on the commission has now resigned as of last week.

The Catholic sex abuse stories have been in the news now for 32 years.  The National Catholic Reporter, an independent Catholic publication, broke the first story 32 years ago.  It remains a story because even if the ones abused by clergy and bishops and cardinals have supportive family and friends, a financial cushion and plenty of time in therapy — all big “ifs” — they never entirely leave it behind.  They never completely heal.

It remains a story because many that have been abuse by clergy find salvation in telling their stories. This is not simply catharsis. They want to be assured that their abusers are known to the world and can never hurt another child. They want to know if their abusers had other victims. They want other victims to know that they were not alone, and that it was not their fault. They want to put their trauma to some use. Only then can they rest.  

Unfortunately many in the Catholic Church, officials and lay people, would like for them to just fade away so they can put these horrible acts (which still continue) behind them.  That is what made the problem worse in the first place lay people in the Catholic Church turned a blind eye to the problem and allowed it to go on for centuries.

The clergy abuse story remains a story because abuse victims often wait years before they are ready to speak. They are too ashamed, or confused, or afraid of not being believed. But eventually they tell someone, and once they start speaking, some cannot stop. That’s why the sexual abuse story has emerged so slowly, over years, in waves. Abuse victims are like combat veterans: The war is long over, but the coping is not. Years after the Vietnam War ended, people are still writing memoirs and making movies, still processing what happened.

Of course, child sexual abuse is an issue everywhere, not just in the Catholic Church.  It takes place in every denomination and even in independent churches.  It takes place in it in schools, scouting organizations, camps, United Nations missions and every public and private organization that involve children.  It happens so often it is hard to keep track: Protestant, Jewish, Hindu, Jehovah’s Witnesses and the most bizarre story of all — an international Christian cult called the Children of God.  But the scandal in the Catholic Church has proved far more extensive. 

You may ask why is it so extensive in the Catholic Church well one reason is the sheer number of Catholics— Catholics make up about a quarter of the American population and are the largest single religious denomination. The Catholic Church is also a hierarchical organization that keeps extensive records, so abuse usually leaves a paper trail.  Another factor, too, is the exalted position of priests, acting “in persona Christi” — in the person of Christ.  And then there is the church’s requirement of celibacy for priests. While many live by and value it, for others it has led to covert sexual relationships with adults, double lives and deep secrets.

Some also theorize that the all-male priesthood is a factor. While it’s quite possible that having women in the clergy would have instilled more accountability and sensitivity, child sexual abuse also happens in faiths with married clergy. It also happens in families.

American Bishops are not abiding by the reforms they agreed to in 2002, in response to the eruption of cases set off by the scandal in Boston. The American bishops agreed to report allegations to the authorities and to remove all credibly accused priests from ministry. They agreed to establish prevention programs in parishes and schools, teach children and adults about warning signs, and conduct background checks on employees.

As a retired priest I and many like me are stewing that colleagues who have failed to protect children make us all look bad — but then news is never about the planes that land safely.

In closing states should drop the statute of limitations for filing criminal charges in all child abuse cases, and extend the statute for filing civil cases to age 60.  Leaders of any organization that know of child abuse within their organization and do not report it immediately should be charged criminally and face a minimum of five years in prison.  

Questions for Pope Francis

Pope Francis I love you, but who are you to judge the convictions of Donald Trump's heart when it come to his being a follower of Christ or not. I wish I could ask you if it is Christian for men of the cloth to rape children. Is it Christian for the leaders of my church, the church I have devoted my life to, to cover up those sins? Is it Christian for Bishops to live in mansions while people starve around the world? Is it Christian for priest to take personal money from the collections and you know they do? If we are going to judge we need to judge our own before we start judging others.

Catholic - Justice

Molest children and the Catholic Bishops will send you to another parish so you can continue your evil deeds on more unsuspected parishioners. Make the mistake of using a hoverboard and you get suspended! I think God is in heaven wondering about the priorities of our bishops. Bishops - I think suspension is a bit much considering your past record on handing down punishment. Bishops remember GOD knows all your sins and mistakes - how many of you need suspending?

Catholic Hierarchy - Double Talk.

 The Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) on Tuesday urged voters not to support candidates in the 2016 elections who are pushing for divorce, death penalty and other measures that it said are against the Church's doctrines.

CBCP President Archbishop Socrates Villegas issued some guidelines for Catholic voters to follow in choosing their candidates in 2016. According to Villegas, a Catholic voter should not support a candidate "who’s legislative or executive programs include initiatives diametrically opposed to (Catholic) Church moral teachings on such vital issues as abortion, euthanasia, the return of the death penalty, divorce and the dilution of the character of Christian marriage," even if the candidate is honest, qualified and the best candidate. We all know there are NO Catholics in the Philippines that are violating their marriage vows taking Communion every Sunday in the Philippines. 

"While we expect every public officer to give life to the constitutional posture of 'benevolent neutrality' in respect to the attitude of the State towards religion, the Catholic voter cannot and should not lend his support to any candidate whose ideology binds him or her to make of the Philippines a secular state that has no tolerance for religion in its public life," Villegas said.

"It has never been the practice of the Catholic Church to hold out a candidate to the faithful as the 'chosen' candidate of the Church," he said. "Church doctrine has remained consistent: Partisanship is an arena into which the Church should not venture."

Villegas also urged the voters to consider political aspirants from other religions. "A Catholic is not closed to the candidacy of a non-Catholic," he said. "In fact, there are worthy candidates from other Christian communities and other religions." "Their qualifications and aspirations must be given serious heed by our Catholic voters, their truly helpful plans and visions must be supported,” Villegas said. As long as they uphold Catholic teachings!

There are an estimated 75,594,148 Catholics in the Philippines according to the latest statistics. The population of the Philippines was estimated at 100,096,496 as of July 1, 2014. The total registered voters in the Philippines as of January 22, 2013 were 52,014,648. Roughly 75% plus (85%) Filipinos are Catholic. That is enough to control any election if 75% (85%) of registered voters are Catholic. I know it is said that Catholics tend not to block vote. But, any time the hierarchy of the Catholic Church speaks out about an election it has to have some influence on the election and to pretend they do not try to choose candidates in my opinion is not entirely honest.

The Philippines is the only country in the world, aside from Vatican City, which lacks divorce laws. How could anyone deny that is not due to the influence of the Catholic Church hierarchy in the Philippines? The Catholic Church does get involved in the political arena in the Philippines the recent battle over artificial birth control is evidence of that. They have a strong influence over any and all laws passed in the Philippines. To my knowledge the only time they have lost a political battle was the one over artificial birth control.

UPDATE: THE BISHOPS LOST THE WAR, BUT WON THE BATTLE THEY MANAGE TO GET THE PHILIPPINE CONGRESS NOT TO FUND THE REPRODUCTIVE BILL IN THE 2016 BUDGET - FOR ALL PRACTICAL PURPOSE NO FUNDS MEANS NO REPRODUCTIVE BILL. 

Any non-Catholic candidate would need to adhere to Catholic doctrine, even if his or her denomination or religion did not support Catholic doctrine, if they wanted the support of the Catholic hierarchy. In other words a non-Catholic candidate might have to go against his or her religious beliefs to satisfy the Catholic hierarchy of the Philippines in order to be elected. Most mainstream Protestant denominations support divorce and artificial birth control.  Many Protestant denominations are not opposed to the death penalty.

I cannot reconcile in my mind how the Catholic hierarchy can maintain they do not demonstrate some partisanship when they dictate what a candidate must believe or support in order to get the Catholic vote.

For a country to have tolerance for  religion in its public life is one thing, but to dictate religious doctrine in public life is quite another. Is the Philippines a secular state where freedom of religion is allowed or is it a religious run state?

While the Philippine law does not permit divorce it does permit Legal separation which allows a couple to live apart and separate their assets, but they are not free to marry again. In fact, they face being charged with adultery if caught with another partner. I wonder how many Filipinos are forced to violate the law because of the Catholic hierarchy’s position on divorce.

Banning divorce in my opinion has not stopped couples from separating and starting new families. Banning divorce appears to me to have contributed to illegitimate births which may cause inheritance problems and certainly could cause emotional stigma for a child.  I have absolutely no problem with Catholic hierarchy requiring Catholics to follow their doctrine, but to attempt to impose their religious beliefs on non-Catholics is unjust to me. 

I have heard obtaining a civil and church annulment can take up to four years and $4000. That would likely be more than a years’ worth of income for the average mall worker. I wonder when forced to choose are they going to choose annulment or to ignore the law. In addition a married couple must have lived separately for five years or had a legal separation for two years before an annulment can be granted.

In 2012 there were only 10,528 people who applied for annulments in the Philippines. There were 476,408 marriages registered in 2011. I find it impossible to believe that only a little over 2% of the marriage ended. It is estimated 40 to 50% of marriages end in divorce/separation in First World countries and I do not believe that number would be much different in any country.

Could it be possible that divorce laws may make couples think twice before walking out on their marriages? Statistics show that the divorce rate in the U.S. in 1981 was 5.3 per 1000 people and in 2012 it had fallen to 3.6 per 1000 people.

The Catholic hierarchy in the Philippines does get involved in politics and governance in the Philippines. When the clergy called for civil unrest and even threatened to excommunicate President Aquino over contraception how can they say they do not. There is no proof that Catholic doctrine pertaining to separation and artificial birth control is even being followed by Catholics and to attempt to impose that on non-Catholics is unjust. 

I would not be surprised if sometime prior to the 2016 election there is a list floating around with the names of candidate that the Catholic hierarchy is supporting.  Of course the Catholic hierarchy will deny having anything to do with it like they did the banner flying from a Catholic church in one of the previous elections.

Is it just for religious leaders in a country that is supposed to have a democratic form of government to use threats of excommunication against any elected official, elected to represent ALL the people, in order to get what they want? 

The Church’s influence in the Philippines is diminishing. The power of social media is taking its toll. It might help the country if they put their devout Catholic past behind them and move toward a more secular state. Politics needs to go beyond religious groups and be more concerned with the needs of all the people regardless of religious affiliation. But, keep in mind no group gives up power without a fight and the Catholic hierarchy will not either.

Protestant denominations are growing in the Philippines and other predominantly Catholic nations like Mexico. How much of that growth could be contributed to the Catholic hierarchy’s desire for influence and control in the political arena. 

2015 Vatican Synod on Family Life

The bishops’ synod wrapped up its business in Rome last weekend what are they all afraid of?

The Final Report made no explicit mention of a path to communion for the divorced and remarried, much less sanctioning “artificial” contraception or living out of wedlock. Same-sex relationships got thumbs down.

Pope Francis took the tiny opening that last year’s synod gave to annulment reform and pushed through new canon law. Who knows what he’ll do with the openings he’s been given now? Are they afraid of what Pope Francis may do in the future or are they afraid that Pope Francis might decide to act on his irritation with conservatives?

If the results of this synod had been under Pope John Paul II it would have raised little concern. The cardinals were not suspicious of Pope John Paul and believed he would not go against anything the Cardinals wanted, but with Pope Francis he is his own man.

The majority of the cardinals would like to see the issue of divorce-remarry-communion remain as the rules were written in the Fourth Century. Eastern Orthodoxy permits sacramental remarriages. The cardinals leading the Roman Catholic Church have yet to realize that some valid marriages sometimes have to be ended by divorce. They prefer Catholics who get divorced apply to them for an annulment and they decide who will be or will not be granted one. They prefer the children of divorced Catholics to be declared illegitimate by the Catholic Church because they were born to a marriage that never existed in the eyes of the Church, that seems harsh to me.  Perhaps I might consider the stand the Catholic leadership takes on divorce for second marriages.

I believe that the marriage-divorce-annulment-remarriage issue is as it is today because, as in many things in our church, the cardinals take the stand that’s the way it has always been and that is the way it will stay. Tradition takes presentence over what is reality, practical and obtainable for today’s Christians.  It would be different if Catholics were adhering to these archaic traditions, but they are not.

The Catholic cardinals did pave the way for greater openness towards divorcees. Cardinals agreed divorcees must be “more integrated in Christian communities”. The cardinals decided to allow the local clergy to decide whether to allow divorcees to participate fully in church life. What was once left to the bishops and ultimately Rome is now in the hands of the local pastors as it should be. I will be more comfortable with this decision when it is formulate and put in writing.

While bishops have spoken, it is up to the pope to decide the next move. Beyond the synod vote, he will face tough opposition in any attempt to change archaic church rules, but the upcoming jubilee year of mercy could serve as an opportunity to table new plans for Catholic Family Life.

Pope Francis on Sunday at the end of the synod appeared to lecture church elders, suggesting they should not be quick to exclude a broad array of people deserving of God’s grace. The pope implied the men of the church needed to be more aware of the needs of the people and take action instead of turning a blind eye and trying not to become involved.

While subjects were addressed that previous popes and synods would have never discussed the opposition in the synod to rapid changes in rules also suggested how far off Catholics may be from seeing Francis’s revolutionary style turned into practice.

Now the media will start debating who won the debate the pope, the conservatives or the liberals.  If anyone won it was the pope for in the end he has the final say. Doors were open for him to make changes.  Changes may take years and he may not live to see them, but at least the ball for change is now rolling and I do not think it can be stopped. The laity today is too intelligent and has access to more knowledge than in the past and will no longer be pushed around and accept doctrine they consider is without merit.  

I think it was a tie and no one won as far as the conservative and reformers go. The conservative were able to prevent changes or slow changes that they adamantly did not want and the liberals or reformers got the debate started on changes they did want and I believe that debate will continue.

I think the Pope was the real winner over all for he made it clear following the synod that he is tired of the Bishops not following his instructions and not practicing what they are teaching.  This is probably why many of them left Rome a bit shaken and frighten.