Cynthia Busuttil
Abuse victim says Church apology too little, too late
Lawrence Grech is one of 10 people who lived at the St Joseph Home in Sta Venera and who claim they had been abused by four priests as they were growing up. Photo: Jason Borg
A man who claims to have been abused by members of the clergy as a child described the Church's apology to sex abuse victims as "too little, too late".
Lawrence Grech's comments come as a Vatican's spokesman said yesterday Pope Benedict XVI was willing to meet more victims of clerical sexual abuse.
Mr Grech, one of 10 people testifying behind closed doors in a court case against three priests charged with sexually abusing minors, said the apology by Archbishop Paul Cremona and Gozo Bishop Mario Grech was weak.
"It is not enough. The Church should apologise to victims individually," Mr Grech insisted yesterday.
In a joint statement on Thursday, Mgr Cremona and Mgr Grech said the Church sympathised with the victims and felt the "need for repentance for the sins of those who committed these abuses".
But Mr Grech, who claims to have been abused as a teenager while living at the St Joseph Home in Sta Venera, said the Church should apologise to the victims and their families who were also affected by the repercussions of the abuse.
He questioned the timing of the apology and said it seemed intended to shut the victims up before the Pope's visit.
According to Italian news agency Ansa, the 37-year-old was going to be among the young people at the Valletta Waterfront holding a banner asking: "Is there justice?"
But when contacted yesterday evening, Mr Grech said that, although he was originally planning to protest, he had changed his mind because he did not want to be blamed for tarnishing the Pope's visit.
However, he and the other nine alleged victims are expected to hold a press conference on Monday.
The father-of-two called on the Pope to apologise to the victims during next week's visit. Speaking on Vatican Radio yesterday, Vatican spokesman Fr Federico Lombardi said "the Pope has written that he is available for new meetings" with victims.
When contacted, a spokesman for the Curia said the Malta Church had not received any requests by victims of clergy abuse to meet the Pope and the programme did not include any such meetings.
Fr Joe Borg, a lecturer and columnist, expressed certainty that the apology was completely independent from the Pope's visit. "I think they would still have apologised if the Pope was not coming," he said.
He pointed out that the apology by the Maltese Church followed the unprecedented letter of apology by the Pope to Irish victims and allegations surfacing in Europe.
Fr Borg hailed the bishops' apology, saying it showed remorse and that they did not go on the defensive. "The statement shows sincere concern by the bishops."
He said the attitude of abject silence, omertà, which existed in the past, was no longer present when it came to cases of child abuse. In fact, in their statement, the bishops said Christians were obliged to cooperate with the Church rather than disguising facts or remaining silent.
Fr Borg said the Church's response team also investigated cases of abuse that would have been time-barred in the eyes of the law.
Moreover, he said, norms established by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger before he became Pope established that all cases had to be reported to the Vatican. Fr Borg said Cardinal Ratzinger had put child abuse as an offence on the same level as abuse of the Eucharist.
Fr Mark Sultana, director of the Church's Pastoral Formation Institute, said the apology verbalised the Church's feelings. "As people and as Christians we are very sorry for what happened to the victims," he said.
Fr Sultana said the Church had not just apologised but set up a response team back in 1999 to investigate cases of abuse.
According to a Curia spokesman, a total of 84 allegations of child abuse, involving 45 Maltese priests, were reported to the response team since 1999.
Adrian Gellel, a lecturer in pastoral theology, liturgy and Canon law, also welcomed the bishops' statement but said more worthy than the apology itself was the fact that the response team had been working to combat abuses for 11 years and the Church had called on its members to cooperate with the competent authorities.
"The sexual abuse of any person is an abhorrent crime equivalent to murder because its effects are devastating. This is more so when it is committed against children who are among the most vulnerable members of society," Dr Gellel said, adding there were no words or actions that could compensate for the evil committed.
He said minors' sexual abuse was not confined to the Church and it would be a mistake to highlight one section of society because it would protect other offenders perpetrating this crime in other settings, discrediting and tarnishing the invaluable work of the majority working within the Church.
"There is the need of true commitment by all, including legislators and other civil authorities, to combat abuse in all settings by any member of society so that no child may ever experience this trauma," Dr Gellel said.
Popular Stories
Update 3: Woman found dead in car,...
Updated: Woman dies in car crash
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Part of Dwejra 'Azure window' collapses
The end of the bar that ‘never closed’
Bundy does not know whether to...
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
This WAS the night - Kurt makes it...
'No need for early election if PM's...
In Discussion
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
Gozo tunnel could take 5-7 years to...
CABS remote controlled aircraft shot...
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Joseph Calleja condemns portrayal of...
Updated: Labour would give...
CABS drone shot down
Second group of migrants arrives
Adrian Vassallo in scathing...
32 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Dr Francis Saliba
Apr 16th 2010, 11:39
@D Phillips
Your comment is a string of gratuitous and, to me, erroneous opinions. You are free to hold those opinions just as I am entitled to reject them. The facts enumerated by me cannot be contested by opinions. I have no intention to contest personal opinions that you buttress only by stooping to intemperate invective.
D Phillips
Apr 15th 2010, 19:23
I’m don’t recall stating that I thought the Church condoned these crimes, it would appear however that he and they decided, in their infinite wisdom, that the name of the Church is and was more important than the well being of innocent children. Quite frankly, the fact that you are blindly defending the Pope, who has been proven to be complicit in this, and the Church, who by association is also complicit, astounds me and you as a Dr of something defending it, disgusts me and many others. This fact would remain, irrespective if you were defending any other institution, and I sincerely hope that, in light of the recent arrest warrants issued for the Israeli foreign minister by the UK courts and that of the President of Sudan, by the international court, that the Pope is also subject to a similar warrant in the hope that it will make the church and its followers realise that they are not special and they are not above the law.
I have no problem whatsoever with any ones right to follow their religion, I do have a problem when they try to extend that right by attempting to brainwash people especially children.
D Phillips
Apr 15th 2010, 19:19
Dr Saliba No agenda against the Church, Catholic or otherwise. It’s interesting you follow an institution that has a history of persecuting others, now you are claiming, unjustly, that your institution is the persecuted. As any organisation is entitled to deal internally with company discipline, they are not entitled to deal with criminal acts as a matter of internal discipline. The church and its members are subject to the same laws as the rest of us. They are not above the law and had they followed the laws/rules as any normal, reasonable person would have, these criminal perverts would have been locked up. Instead, his Popiness moves these criminal perverts to other areas where they are free to continue their perversions on innocent children, with the full knowledge of his Popiness, making him an accessory. Excuses so far emanating from the Catholic Church all over the globe have included statute of limitations and, bizarrely in Malta, it has to be the abused who file the complaint. For an institution that claims to be morally perfect and act as the moral compass for us mortals, its sickens me to hear them try to wriggle out of their obligations on technicalities. (continued)
Dr Francis Saliba
Apr 14th 2010, 21:05
@DPhillips
Fact 1 - "Child abuse is prevalent throughout the" whole world and not only "throughout the Catholic Church". You reserve your invective preferentially against the Catholic Church. What is your hidden agenda?
Fact 2 - The Church is an autonomous organisation fully entitled to deal internally with the internal discipline of its members. You may choose distort that as "an attempted cover-up". I disagree as long as the Church does not deny the right of anybody else to seek redress in the civil courts.
Fact 3 - As one of its preventive disciplinary measures the Church posted errant priests away from contact with their prey - not always with success - but that is not the same as "moving them around" so as to expose other children to sexual abuse.
Fact 4 - I do not justify child abuse by anybody - I condemn it unreservedly. I condemn just as strongly any distortion of the tragic abuse of children by errant individual priests as some despicable crime that is condoned by the Church.
Fact 5 - The necessity for confidentiality already amply given by me have now been confirmed by judge Caruana Colombo.
D Phillips
Apr 14th 2010, 19:19
Dr Saliba
Fact – Child abuse is prevalent throughout the Catholic Church
Fact – Pope Benedict XVI and other members of the Vatican hierarchy attempted to cover it up, in the delusional belief that protecting the church is and was more important than protecting children.
Fact – Paedophiles within the Catholic Church were moved around rather than being reported to the police, thereby exposing other children to these perversions.
Now, you personally, can try and justify any part of the whole tragic and disgusting episode.For me, and I would imagine ,most reasoned people, the well being of children supercedes the interests of any institution, morally corrupt or otherwise. But blind devotion is a strong drug (I think).
Dr Francis Saliba
Apr 14th 2010, 10:59
@D Phillips
Your irascible invective against the Catholic Church and its followers is no substitute for reasoned argument. Nowhere in my comments will you find any trace of “making excuses” for child sexual abuse by priests or to make that crime look “less heinous”. You will find a lot of criticism for those who after the lapse of decades raise exorbitant demands for apologies and pecuniary settlements that, in any case, they will dismiss as “too late and insufficient”. The primary cause of the delay is the neglect of the parties involved to lodge a report with the police as was their right. I criticize those extraneous people who expect that the Church Response Team should itself have disregarded the choice of the aggrieved party that the abuse be tackled by the Response Team and not by the police. The abused child and family had every right to avoid the harmful effects of publicity if they so desired. Neither the response team, nor any anti-Catholic person, has the right to question that demand for privacy.
Dr Francis Saliba
Apr 13th 2010, 21:29
@D Phillips
Before I pay any attention to your judgment that I made some unidentified “mistake” I would require a much higher degree of proof than your bland unsupported opinion. My “initial statement” was that most persons do not reach adulthood without encountering some sexual abuse. It is the result of long personal experience as a practicing family doctor. You are in no position to prove that I was being “ill-informed” for decades by all sorts of patients. My second statement that most of these victims succeeded in developing into mentally well-adjusted adults cannot be misconstrued as any defense of sexual abuse. It is a simple statement of fact that you find unpalatable because it does not fit in with your mind-set to blame the official church for all child sexual abuses carried out, not only by the occasional unworthy member of the Church hierarchy but also by people belonging to all sorts of other organizations and which do not upset you to the same degree.
D Phillips
Apr 13th 2010, 18:00
Dr Saliba
The English, I understand perfectly. Your inability to admit to a mistake, the epitome of the institution you try to defend, is where the understanding begins to fail me. Your initial statement is, at best ill-informed, at worst a complete falsehood. Your second statement, even if it was true, which I doubt very much, does not make the abuse any less heinous, and frankly is a disgusting attempt to lessen the seriousness of these crimes.
The continued, blinkered, defence of the Catholic Church, its (proven to be), complicit leader of a morally bankrupt institution, and the cowardly perverts who preyed on and continue to prey on young children, whilst at the same time professing to deliver the words of God and Jesus Christ, is something that is inconceivable to reasonable people.
It says a lot for followers of this church and this Pope when protecting the church comes before protecting innocent children.
Dr Francis Saliba
Apr 13th 2010, 14:44
@D Phillips
The difficulty is that you do not seem to understand my plain and simple English or, more probably, that you pretend not to understand it unless I “qualify” my statements to make them conform with your mind set. That is one more reason why I cannot hold a logical dialogue with you. Please keep on reading my comment until you manage to understand it.
D Phillips
Apr 13th 2010, 14:05
The vilification that the church is now suffering, and rightly so, is no stronger nor more focused than that that would be brought upon any other organisation accused of similar abuses. Where it differs is the systematic attempts to cover up, what can only be described as abhorrent practises by vile people, which reaches right to the top of the totem pole, Benedict XVI. Of course the focus is on Catholic priests at the moment, whether they be in Malta, Ireland, Germany, US or any where else, because the abuse allegations are centred around the Catholic Church. Nobody is saying that priests from the Catholic Church are the only people who have abused, do abuse or will abuse children. However when proven allegations like this come out about the Church, whether it be Catholic, Protestant or any other, naturally the condemnation is going to be strong because of how the Church and its members portray themselves and what the Church claims to stand for.
D Phillips
Apr 13th 2010, 14:04
Dr Saliba,
Firstly, I think “If you deny that obvious truth then there is no point in engaging in any dialogue with you”. A statement, which certainly seems to be in keeping with the totalitarian authority within the Church. Nothing can be discussed UNLESS you agree with me, is a not a great platform to encourage open debate.
Your two sentences have two distinct meanings, and I’m merely attempting to ascertain as to whether your belief is indeed that MOST children experience some sort of abuse or that most of them suffer no ill effects, or both, or whether your second statement was merely an attempt to backtrack on the original.
There is one difference in this case that I can see and that is that the church and the Pope are being defended by people, who if the accusations were against any other institution or against people from a walk of life other than the church, would be loudly and vociferously, and rightly, attacking the perpetrators as the lowest of the low. Now who’s applying two weights,two measures?
(continued)
Dr Francis Saliba
Apr 12th 2010, 21:28
@DPhillips
Be true to yourself and admit the obvious fact that the on-going local correspondence about child abuse is focused exclusively on Catholic priests, as distinct from members of all other organizations combined. If you deny that obvious truth then there is no point in engaging in any dialogue with you.
My two sentences quoted by you are clear enough as long as you do not let your imagination run riot and as long as you do not try to elaborate on them. They are statements of facts as known to me. I do not see any need to “qualify” them.
I have never made excuses for any form of child abuse nor do I approve attempts at cover ups. "Cover ups" were carried out by those who had the prime obligation and the right to lodge complaints with the police but omitted to do so, but complained instead only to the ecclesiastical tribunals and expected them to do that which they declined to do for reasons known only to themselves.
D Phillips
Apr 12th 2010, 15:04
It’s telling, that those having been convicted of involvement in paedophilia are seen as the lowest of the low, by other criminals. Yet some, who would profess to be morally superior to these criminals, try and make excuses for the crimes because of their belief in the Catholic Church. Paedophilia is a crime, a crime that rightly disgusts people. No-one is above the law.
“The point is that as long as the protests are directed with insistence uniquely against the Catholic Church the motivation for such criticism could only be enmity against the Church and not any genuine interest in the well being of children at risk”. The people who covered up these abuses to protect the “good name” of the church are those who had no “genuine interest in the well being of children at risk” and any concern being shown now is only being shown as a damage limitation exercise in a vain attempt to bolster the church.
D Phillips
Apr 12th 2010, 14:55
Dr Francis Saliba,
The Catholic Church is not being singled out for special treatment. The treatment it is receiving is the same as any other institution would receive having been proved to be complicit in crimes and cover ups such as these. The fact that said crimes involve the abuse of children and that the subsequent attempts to cover it up meant more children were exposed to these vile perverts, makes it beyond comprehension.
Is your opinion that “most children experience some sort of child abuse and grow up to be well balanced normal adults”, or is that “most abused children grow up into normal adults”. If it’s the former I’d be most interested to hear you qualify this statement, if it’s the latter I’d be interested to know if you think that makes it acceptable or any less of a heinous act. Growing up to be a well-balanced adult after suffering abuse defines the strength of character of the victim and should not be used as a benchmark for the acceptability of the acts perpetrated by these sick, sick people (Classing both those who commit the act and those who cover it up as equally sick)
(Continued)
Dr Francis Saliba
Apr 11th 2010, 09:30
@ D Phillips.
The point is that as long as the protests are directed with insistence uniquely against the Catholic Church the motivation for such criticism could only be enmity against the Church and not any genuine interest in the well being of children at risk.
Dr Francis Saliba
Apr 11th 2010, 09:00
@DPhillips.
In spite of your opinion to the contrary no one can deny that “that the Catholic Church is being singled out for special harassment” when compared with other organizations whose members abuse children. My opinion that the great majority of abused children grow up into normal adults without sexual hang-ups is based on sixty years of medical experience as a family doctor and is shared by many others doctors. On what grounds do you base your opinion that my statement is bizarre?
M.Borg
Apr 10th 2010, 23:04
And yet priests who abused children were left and are left in parishes full of young children!
G.Micallef
Apr 10th 2010, 22:03
Ghaziz Sur Grech,
Ieqaf sawwat lill-Knisja. Mhux il-Knisja abbuzat minnek, imma persuna juew persuni li inzertaw nies li inqdew biha! Nifhem l-ugiegh tieghek Sur Grech u nikkundanna kull agir pervers li sar fuqek meta int kont innocenti pero' fl-istess waqt ipprova ifhem ukoll li l-INDIVIDWU li abbuza minnek ghandu illum qabel ghada JITOLBOK APOLOGIJA u jekk hemm bzonn APOLOGIJA PUBBLIKA! Nittama li tifhem.
Trevor Lorenzo Mizzi
Apr 10th 2010, 21:52
Forget the apology, start paying some serious cash settlements to all you sexually abused through the years dear curia.
Paul Vassallo
Apr 10th 2010, 19:14
How is it that so many children which claim that they have been abused none of them reported to the police or some grown up person to take a report to the police and why come out with it years after,surely if at that time they were at a tender age and they were afraid a few years after they could have had enough courage to report the matter to the civil authorities
Dr Ing. Patrick Attard
Apr 10th 2010, 18:38
On the 18th May 2001 Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger sent a letter imposing a pontifical secret on the victims, accused and any witness in cases of abuse. Breaking the secret meant automatic excommunication from the Catholic Church. I don´t think people will believe that the victims were allowed to go to the police or issue press releases!
See the original letter in Latin:
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20010518_epistula_graviora%20delicta_lt.html
See the letter in English:
http://www.sarabite.info/vatletter.pdf
Theologian Hans Küng, former colleague of Joseph Ratzinger at the University of Tübingen, calls for the Pope to pronounce his own Mea Culpa on the basis of this letter:
"Ratzinger himself, in a letter on "grave sexual crimes" addressed to all the bishops under the date of 18 May, 2001, warned the bishops, under threat of ecclesiastical punishment, to observe "papal secrecy" in such cases."
"Honesty demands that Joseph Ratzinger himself, the man who for decades has been principally responsible for the worldwide cover-up, at last pronounce his own "mea culpa"."
National Catholic Reporter:
http://ncronline.org/news/accountability/ratzingers-responsibility
D Phillips
Apr 10th 2010, 17:48
Dr Francis Saliba,
"It should be obvious to all reasonable people that few children reach adulthood without some experience of sexual abuse from grown ups" - You think? What a bizarre statement to make.
"the Catholic Church that is singled out as if sexual abuse of cildren is confined to Catholic priests". You know full well that is not the point.
Trying to defend the indefensible.
Louise Vella
Apr 10th 2010, 15:53
II
“Fr Sultana said the Church had not just apologised but set up a response team back in 1999 to investigate cases of abuse.”
The response team, before which I appeared as a witness in 2000, is made of persons trusted by the Church to keep silent and protect the reputation of the Church.
“According to a Curia spokesman, a total of 84 allegations of child abuse, involving 45 Maltese priests, were reported to the response team since 1999.”
45 priests out of about 900 is not a little – 5%.
“Adrian Gellel … said more worthy than the apology itself was the fact that the response team had been working to combat abuses for 11 years”
The response team has been working to hush up things and protect the reputation of the Church and priest child molesters
Louise Vella
Apr 10th 2010, 15:52
I
“In a joint statement on Thursday, Mgr Cremona and Mgr Grech said the Church sympathised with the victims and felt the "need for repentance for the sins of those who committed these abuses".”
These are crimes, not only sins. Any non-priest who commits such crimes will have to face justice before the courts. Are Mgr Cremona and Mgr Grech ready to open the Curia’s secret archives to the police so that they can prosecute?
“a spokesman for the Curia said the Malta Church had not received any requests by victims of clergy abuse to meet the Pope and the programme did not include any such meetings.”
Who decided on the programme?
“Fr Joe Borg … said the attitude of abject silence, omertà, which existed in the past, was no longer present when it came to cases of child abuse. In fact, in their statement, the bishops said Christians were obliged to cooperate with the Church rather than disguising facts or remaining silent.”
Omertà no longer present? Why are the Curia’s archives still secret? Why does the Church not encourage victims and their families to report to the police?
Dr Francis Saliba
Apr 10th 2010, 14:28
It should be obvious to all reasonable people that few children reach adulthood without some experience of sexual abuse from grown ups belonging to all sorts of organizations. Most victims of this sexual abuse grow up to become well-balanced normal adults with no hang-ups. These other organizations are not vehemently condemned for the abuses committed by their errant members. The sole exception is the Catholic Church that is singled out as if sexual abuse of cildren is confined to Catholic priests.
When the abuser happens to belong to the small minority of lapsing Catholic clergy no amount of genuine expressions of regret from everyone from His Holiness the Pope to diocesan bishops, and no amount of large disbursements that bring many dioceses to the brink of financial ruin, could ever satisfy the insatiable cravings of anti-Catholics. They squeeze this tragic but very understandable human weakness to the last drop in the vain hope that this could somehow undermine the observant Christians’ reliance on Christ’s promise that, in spite of all the human weaknesses, He will always be with his faithful to the end of time and that the gates of Hell would never prevail.
ray sacco
Apr 10th 2010, 20:10
do you know of any organization which hid and protected child molesters? and what has the gates of hell got to do with child abuse????????
M Attard
Apr 10th 2010, 13:44
don't forget very heavy compensation.. these people deserve nothing else,talk is cheap
Roderick Mallia
Apr 10th 2010, 13:10
Personally I think that priests also must face trial and sentenced to jail after all they are normal people like us. So if a man sexually abuses a minor he gets a jail sentence and if a Priest does it then all he gets is to say sorry!
Louise Vella
Apr 10th 2010, 12:38
II
“Fr Sultana said the Church had not just apologised but set up a response team back in 1999 to investigate cases of abuse.”
The response team, before which I appeared as a witness in 2000, is made of persons trusted by the Church to keep silent and protect the reputation of the Church.
“According to a Curia spokesman, a total of 84 allegations of child abuse, involving 45 Maltese priests, were reported to the response team since 1999.”
45 priests out of about 900 is not a little – 5%.
“Adrian Gellel … said more worthy than the apology itself was the fact that the response team had been working to combat abuses for 11 years”
The response team has been working to hush up things and protect the reputation of the Church and priest child molesters
Joseph Cauchi
Apr 10th 2010, 11:14
{A man who claims to have been abused by members of the clergy as a child described the Church's apology to sex abuse victims as "too little, too late”}.
What does he mean by “too little”?
Could someone elaborate, please?
JC.
Edward Camilleri
Apr 10th 2010, 10:50
@He said minors' sexual abuse was not confined to the Church and it would be a mistake to highlight one section of society.
Yes ofcourse, but one was of the impression that in the Church these things do not happen. However the most serious crime was not that some priests abused minors, but the cover up to ensure no outsiders learn of these pervets. This is what makes the matter more disgusting.
And to this day, we have not yet heard of a police investigation, to ensure that the law is upheld.
Alison Bezzina
Apr 10th 2010, 10:48
What a Papal Joke!!!
http://www.timesofmalta.com.mt/blogs/view/20100409/alison-bezzina/what-a-papal-joke