Antony Barnett, public affairs editorSunday August 17, 2003The Observer
The Vatican instructed Catholic bishops around the world to cover up cases of sexual abuse or risk being thrown out of the Church.
The Observer has obtained a 40-year-old confidential document from the secret Vatican archive which lawyers are calling a 'blueprint for deception and concealment'. One British lawyer acting for Church child abuse victims has described it as 'explosive'.
The 69-page Latin document bearing the seal of Pope John XXIII was sent to every bishop in the world. The instructions outline a policy of 'strictest' secrecy in dealing with allegations of sexual abuse and threatens those who speak out with excommunication.
They also call for the victim to take an oath of secrecy at the time of making a complaint to Church officials. It states that the instructions are to 'be diligently stored in the secret archives of the Curia [Vatican] as strictly confidential. Nor is it to be published nor added to with any commentaries.'
The document, which has been confirmed as genuine by the Roman Catholic Church in England and Wales, is called 'Crimine solicitationies', which translates as 'instruction on proceeding in cases of solicitation'.
It focuses on sexual abuse initiated as part of the confessional relationship between a priest and a member of his congregation. But the instructions also cover what it calls the 'worst crime', described as an obscene act perpetrated by a cleric with 'youths of either sex or with brute animals (bestiality)'.
Bishops are instructed to pursue these cases 'in the most secretive way... restrained by a perpetual silence... and everyone... is to observe the strictest secret which is commonly regarded as a secret of the Holy Office... under the penalty of excommunication'.
Texan lawyer Daniel Shea uncovered the document as part of his work for victims of abuse from Catholic priests in the US. He has handed it over to US authorities, urging them to launch a federal investigation into the clergy's alleged cover-up of sexual abuse.
He said: 'These instructions went out to every bishop around the globe and would certainly have applied in Britain. It proves there was an international conspiracy by the Church to hush up sexual abuse issues. It is a devious attempt to conceal criminal conduct and is a blueprint for deception and concealment.'
British lawyer Richard Scorer, who acts for children abused by Catholic priests in the UK, echoes this view and has described the document as 'explosive'.
He said: 'We always suspected that the Catholic Church systematically covered up abuse and tried to silence victims. This document appears to prove it. Threatening excommunication to anybody who speaks out shows the lengths the most senior figures in the Vatican were prepared to go to prevent the information getting out to the public domain.'
Scorer pointed out that as the documents dates back to 1962 it rides roughshod over the Catholic Church's claim that the issue of sexual abuse was a modern phenomenon.
He claims the discovery of the document will raise fresh questions about the actions of Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, the head of the Roman Catholic Church in England and Wales.
Murphy-O'Connor has been accused of covering up allegations of child abuse when he was Bishop of Arundel and Brighton. Instead of reporting to the police allegations of abuse against Michael Hill, a priest in his charge, he moved him to another position where he was later convicted for abusing nine children.
Although Murphy-O'Connor has apologised publicly for his mistake, Scorer claims the secret Vatican document raises the question about whether his failure to report Hill was due to him following this instruction from Rome.
Scorer, who acts for some of Hill's victims, said: 'I want to know whether Murphy-O'Connor knew of these Vatican instructions and, if so, did he apply it. If not, can he tell us why not?'
A spokesman for the Catholic Church denied that the secret Vatican orders were part of any organised cover-up and claims lawyers are taking the document 'out of context' and 'distorting it'.
He said: 'This document is about the Church's internal disciplinary procedures should a priest be accused of using confession to solicit sex. It does not forbid victims to report civil crimes. The confidentiality talked about is aimed to protect the accused as applies in court procedures today. It also takes into consideration the special nature of the secrecy involved in the act of confession.' He also said that in 1983 the Catholic Church in England and Wales introduced its own code dealing with sexual abuse, which would have superseded the 1962 instructions. Asked whether Murphy-O'Connor was aware of the Vatican edict, he replied: 'He's never mentioned it to me.'
Lawyers point to a letter the Vatican sent to bishops in May 2001 clearly stating the 1962 instruction was in force until then. The letter is signed by Cardinal Ratzinger, the most powerful man in Rome beside the Pope and who heads the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith - the office which ran the Inquisition in the Middle Ages.
Rev Thomas Doyle, a US Air Force chaplain in Germany and a specialist in Church law, has studied the document. He told The Observer: 'It is certainly an indication of the pathological obsession with secrecy in the Catholic Church, but in itself it is not a smoking gun.
'If, however, this document actually has been the foundation of a continuous policy to cover clergy crimes at all costs, then we have quite another issue. There are too many authenticated reports of victims having been seriously intimidated into silence by Church authorities to assert that such intimidation is the exception and not the norm.
'If this document has been used as a justification for this intimidation then we possibly have what some commentators have alleged, namely, a blueprint for a cover-up. This is obviously a big "if" which requires concrete proof.'
Additional research by Jason Rodrigues
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2003
― Al Andalous, Sunday, 17 August 2003 17:15 (twenty-two years ago)
― Al Andalous, Sunday, 17 August 2003 17:16 (twenty-two years ago)
― Al Andalous, Sunday, 17 August 2003 17:36 (twenty-two years ago)
― Tep (ktepi), Sunday, 17 August 2003 17:39 (twenty-two years ago)
― Tep (ktepi), Sunday, 17 August 2003 17:43 (twenty-two years ago)
― amateurist (amateurist), Sunday, 17 August 2003 19:55 (twenty-two years ago)
― Bob Shaw (Bob Shaw), Sunday, 17 August 2003 19:59 (twenty-two years ago)
Arguably, neither did J23 on behalf of the Church, really. But aside from that: Honda claims a superiority of product; morality is one of the RCC's products.
It's not like I'm justifying any such policy, obviously, just that its existence had already been assumed -- the only thing under debate is to what extent it was formalized, when, and by whom.
― Tep (ktepi), Sunday, 17 August 2003 20:07 (twenty-two years ago)
― amateurist (amateurist), Sunday, 17 August 2003 20:15 (twenty-two years ago)
― Bob Shaw (Bob Shaw), Sunday, 17 August 2003 20:16 (twenty-two years ago)
― Bob Shaw (Bob Shaw), Sunday, 17 August 2003 20:26 (twenty-two years ago)
It's a little tricky to come right out and say, "Listen, if you'd let Ted have a chick, he wouldn't have fucked any kids," though.
― Tep (ktepi), Sunday, 17 August 2003 20:30 (twenty-two years ago)
― Bob Shaw (Bob Shaw), Sunday, 17 August 2003 20:34 (twenty-two years ago)
― Tep (ktepi), Sunday, 17 August 2003 20:36 (twenty-two years ago)
― Bob Shaw (Bob Shaw), Sunday, 17 August 2003 20:45 (twenty-two years ago)
― dave q, Monday, 18 August 2003 07:40 (twenty-two years ago)
― Tep (ktepi), Monday, 18 August 2003 07:49 (twenty-two years ago)
― nnnh oh oh nnnh nnnh oh (James Blount), Monday, 18 August 2003 07:59 (twenty-two years ago)
So I think it's going to be a liberal. I don't think it's going to be an American, and I doubt it'll be an African either. And one of the things JP2 has done -- changing which Cardinals can elect a Pope -- could make it go either way, cause on the one hand it means most of the Cardinals were ... what's the word, incardinated, incardinalated, tep's-had-some-margaritas-ated ... by JP2, but on the other it means they're younger than the Cardinal general populace.
Depending on when this happens, I think clergy attrition has got to be something they consider, because they know the Pope's gonna be there awhile, and if things continue as they're going, it's gonna reach crisis levels in 20 years. The easiest ways to deal with attrition are getting rid of celibacy, increasing the power and presence of the lay ministers, or ordaining women.
I forget what I was talking about now!
― Tep (ktepi), Monday, 18 August 2003 08:14 (twenty-two years ago)
― dave q, Monday, 18 August 2003 08:22 (twenty-two years ago)
Pope John XXIII was THE visionary Pope of last century and a wonderful man. Anyone who has studied this mans life will know he simply would not have "established a policy of covering sexual abuse", its absurd. Here is a non catholic view of the great man in 1962 from Time Magazine
http://www.catholic.net/RCC/News/Time_Mag/1962.html
For a few quick responses to these lies, see links below, if youd like a fuller explanation of any of the claims made in this rotten article ask away... its all garbage.
http://www.catholicleague.org/03press_releases/quarter3/030807_cbs.htmhttp://www.catholicleague.org/03press_releases/quarter3/030808_cbs.htm
As for celibacy it is a discipline and as such is changeable but not likey nor in my opinion necessary or desirable for many reasons. Your reasoning would be appropriate if the recent scandal were a pervasive problem affecting a large proportion of the clergy. It is not. Priests are sinners like anyone else. It is to be expected therefore that a few priests might sin in this particular area (fewer than 0.5% of priests have been accused of any wrongdoing in this "scandal", and far fewer have actually been found guilty of anything).
― kiwi, Tuesday, 19 August 2003 04:50 (twenty-two years ago)
http://www.catholicleague.org/03press_releases/quarter3/030807_cbs.htm
No2
http://www.catholicleague.org/03press_releases/quarter3/030808_cbs.htm
― , Tuesday, 19 August 2003 04:53 (twenty-two years ago)
― anthony easton (anthony), Tuesday, 19 August 2003 05:05 (twenty-two years ago)
I dont know much about the merits of the league, someone just provided me with this link but I know enough about confession and Pope John XXIII to find myself in agreement with them on this issue.
― Kiwi, Tuesday, 19 August 2003 05:08 (twenty-two years ago)
hmmmmm. ha.
― , Tuesday, 19 August 2003 05:50 (twenty-two years ago)
― Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Tuesday, 19 August 2003 14:01 (twenty-two years ago)
priests who fuck kids like to fuck kids, no amount of celibacy changes will fix that.
many of these priests fuck 17 or 18 year olds, that isnt fucking kids thats fucking adults (power dilacetc has problems here)
teachers and boyscout leaders are more likely to fuck kids then priests, priests have about the same level as any other profession with access.
the vatican tends to be v. good at hiding its scandals, but thats mostly cause they have had both power and experience.
― anthony, Sunday, 25 July 2004 11:04 (twenty-one years ago)
RE: teachers and boyscout leaders, do you have anything to back that up?
― stevo (stevo), Sunday, 25 July 2004 15:01 (twenty-one years ago)
heard about this on npr the other day and could hardly contain my rage/disgust. it's about donald mcguire, some bigshot in the Jesuits. i mean obviously this shit has been going on for decades but the details still can shock
Catholic Church Aware of Donald McGuire's Abuse of Young Boys By Kay Jones While the Catholic Church has long denied knowing about Rev. Donald McGuire's pedophilia, new documents being made public on Monday indicate that at least ten separate church officials were aware of McGuire's transgressions. These documents, detailed in a press release by Jeff Anderson & Associates, could be a deciding factor on the civil suit against the Catholic Church. The proof that three separate Catholic institutions and ten church officials were aware of McGuire's abuse is contained in over 30 pages of secret Jesuit documents according to the press release. These documents are being made public by the attorneys for the victims of McGuire as part of the civil lawsuit process.
The letters documented complaints of multiple families about McGuire during his time as a priest and span over fifty years. In the letters, families accuse McGuire of having inappropriate contact with their boys. The accusations included showing pornography, sharing a bed with young boys, and suspected sexual abuse.
According to the press release, these documents seem to prove that the Catholic church was aware the priest's pedophilia and history of being an abuser but did nothing to protect the abused or the rest of the congregation.
The Catholic Church did not report any incidents of abuse to law enforcement or attempt to discipline McGuire in any way. McGuire was sent to posts all over the world and molested many boys over the course of the next half century. He was only arrested and convicted in 2006.
In one incident detailed in the released documents, McGuire was transferred from his position at Loyola Academy in 1970 because of evidence that he abused a student. Further notifications of McGuire abusing boys were made by families in 1993, 1994, 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2003.
One family was particularly persistent in notifying the Catholic authorities according to the press release. They repeatedly called and wrote Catholic authorities about the priest's actions, but were ignored in the years 2001-2003. Instead, an official finally wrote them asking for trust, but did not offer to investigate their claims against McGuire.
It also appears from the contents of the documents according to Jeff Anderson & Associates that Catholic Church officials intentionally misled investigators about what they knew of the priest's past history of pedophilia. Even after his arrest, it is alleged that they misled the Wisconsin District Attorney, who was the prosecutor on the criminal case against McGuire in 2006. At the time, the Catholic Church claimed it had no information regarding the case.
also, npr link http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=15683354
― gershy, Wednesday, 31 October 2007 04:58 (eighteen years ago)