A battle continues to rage in New York State over legislation that would modify the statute of limitations for bring sexual abuse lawsuits against the Catholic Church and other organizations. True to form - and despite crocodile tears of sorrow over the abuse of thousands of children and youths - the leadership of the Roman Catholic Church is fighting like a bunch of Mafia dons to kill the legislation which would open the Church up to potentially many more lawsuits. Let's be clear, the Church leadership's only sorrow (and that includes from Pope Benedict XVI on down) is over the fact that the truth got out and the Church has had to pay out huge sums of its precious money.*
On April 24th - likely after much lobbying by the Church - Newsday came out with an editorial against the legislation. In part the editorial read as follows:
*
Righting the church's wrongs is not the role of the State Legislature. Under consideration in Albany is an ill-advised bill that would tamper with the deadlines for bringing childhood sexual abuse lawsuits. It would allow a one-year opportunity to file retroactive claims for compensation and punitive damages regardless of when the abuse occurred - in some cases, 30, 40 or 50 years ago.
*
This political effort is so alarming because it clearly targets the Catholic Church. Although other religions and private institutions, such as the Boy Scouts, would also be subject to the law, the Markey bill leaves in place the time ban for lawsuits against public institutions. This is a glaring omission. More sexual abuse of minors has been documented as occurring in public schools than as being perpetrated by Catholic clergy. The public schools are exempt, however, because the powerful teachers unions objected to this unfair law.
*
Albany lawmakers, whose politically motivated decisions typically suggest neither careful deliberation nor thoughtful action, are entering a dangerous area. They risk permitting a secular legal system to decide what a religious community owes its aggrieved faithful.To do so is to join in the desire for revenge against a very powerful and wealthy institution. But revenge is not justice.
*
Fortunately, some are speaking out against the effort to give the Church a pass and allow gross misdeeds to be swept forever under the rug. As a former Catholic, I am convinced that the ONLY thing that will bring the Church to address its past sins - other than by blaming gays - is more bad publicity in respect to sex abuse lawsuits and the pay off of additional large sums of money, the Church's true God. Among those speaking out is Irwin M. Zalkin who has handled lawsuits against the Catholic Church. True, Mr. Zalkin and his firm have made a great deal of money in the process, but he has also seen at close hand the pernicious evil within the Church leadership. Here are some highlights on Zalkin's response:
*
"The Newsday Editorial of April 24 2009, entitled "Keep the State out of the Church," calls for the State Legislature to abandon the principle of accountability to survivors of the historical scourge of childhood sexual abuse," stated Zalkin. As Zalkin explains: "While conceding that the Catholic Church harbored sexual predators, the Newsday editors argue that due to the passage of time survivors of this wrongful conduct should not be provided their day in court. Under the editors' reasoning, neither judge nor jury should be allowed to weigh the evidence of such wrongful harboring of predators and the damage it caused. Instead, due to the mere fact that one day has followed another, survivors, their families, their employers, and society at large must pay for the cost of the damage. Damage inflicted by religious corporations when they committed wrongful acts in their dealings with pedophiles, ephebophiles, and children."
*
Zalkin offers the report of the Suffolk County Supreme Court, Special Grand Jury Report, released in February of 2003, as proof that the evidence of these crimes still exist. "In the Diocese of Rockville Center, average citizens, members of a grand jury, armed with subpoena power were able to uncover substantial evidence, both in the form of documents and percipient witness testimony, of the historical fact of childhood sexual abuse committed by religious leaders in their community," explains Zalkin. "The grand jury uncovered evidence that the local diocese had protected at least 58 abusive priests. The diocese engaged in aggressive tactics that purported to help victims and their families but that actually used intimidation, claims of confidentiality, hush payments, and other means to cover-up abusive conduct."
*
"The United States Supreme Court teaches that even religious conduct can be regulated for the protection of society. There is no valid argument that the sexual abuse of children is beyond review of civil courts simply because the offending hands and minds are otherwise ordained for the service of God. In crying against civil review of religious entities the editors miss the point that the offending entities have availed themselves of the privileges and benefits of civil incorporation under the laws of the State. Through those incorporations, the entities have chosen to operate under, and be subject to, the civil justice system. Rather than crushing the principle of accountability, the editors should express a bit more faith in the abilities of the members of their readership, local citizens serving as judges and juries, to do what is right in light of available evidence."
*
In my view, if it takes bankrupting many more dioceses to force the Church to finally fully accept responsibility for its misdeeds, then so be it. As has been noted, the problem of cover up and failure to punish high clergy involved goes all the way to the level of the Pope, including the less than saintly John Paul II who some wrongly want to fast track to canonization:
*
As John Cornwell points out with regard to the above, John Paul showed more concern with the effect the scandal has on the church than the effect on the children. He was “afflicted” by the sins of other priests; merely “concerned” for the victims. Priests betrayed their vows of ordination, but there is nothing here about any other betrayals — like trust that a child has for their priest.
*
It can also be noted that John Paul’s analysis of the situation was taken up entirely by a focus on a “bad apples” explanation. Aside from the workings of Satan, all we have are a few bad priests — gay priests primarily, but still just a few bad apples messing things up for everyone else. There is no indication that larger, structural causes are even contemplated, much less in line to be addressed.
*
Pope John Paul II had censored any discussion of what role priestly celibacy may have played in the actions of the accused priests, but not so with homosexuality. Statements from Vatican officials have expressed strong disapproval of the very existence of homosexuals within the priesthood — the presumption being that the sexual abuse problems are caused by gays and that if they disappear, then so will the problems.
No comments:
Post a Comment