Child abuse 'wasn't a priority'
Related Articles
A MEMBER of the child protection service team in the under-fire diocese of Cloyne acknowledged that paedophilia had been totally underestimated by the Irish Church.
The official, who cannot be named for legal reasons, also warned that a minority of solicitors "discovered a bonanza" in the State Abuse Redress Board.
The critical comments were made in a document entitled 'Ministry in the Diocese' -- which has been seen by the Irish Independent -- by a senior member of the Cloyne Diocesan Child Protection Service.
Each diocese has such a team to assist in the implementation of child protection policies and procedures, both in terms of prevention and in response to allegations. The revelation came as pressure continued to mount on the Bishop of Cloyne, Dr John Magee, to retire or resign following two critical reports on his diocese's handling of clerical abuse allegations.
Opposition TDs and victims' rights groups have called for Dr Magee's departure, warning that his position is now untenable. It has now emerged that a member of Dr Magee's child protection team acknowledged that paedophilia was seriously underestimated. "It (child abuse) would have ranked in a lower case list with perversities such as bestiality and necrophilia," the official wrote.
"It merited little pastoral consideration because of the lack of appreciation of how common the practice was and of what serious damage it caused."
The pastoral article -- written several years ago -- also acknowledged that the Church, like others, had "little understanding" of how obsessive the paedophile addiction could be.
Trauma
The official pointed out that dealing with such clerical abuse allegations was "stressful", particularly when having to deal "face-to-face with the trauma of both complainant and accused".
However, and most controversially, the official was also scathing about the state-established Abuse Redress Board.
"A questionable claim may be more likely to succeed where the alleged abuser is deceased," he wrote. The accused is not there to marshal defence. The outcome of the civil case for damages would then depend on the lesser standard of proof based on the balance of probabilities rather than the standard of beyond reasonable doubt in the criminal trial.
"The history of the redress board set up by the State to investigate abuse in residential centres does raise questions.
"The accused did not have proper opportunity to a defence against the charges -- nor did the process allow for any real challenge. A minority of solicitors discovered a bonanza in the process. One [also] accepts that relatively few false complaints are lodged against accused who are still alive," he wrote.
The diocesan official pointed out that "we should not lose sight of the statistics that no more than 4pc of those charged are clerics".
- Ralph Riegel
