Joe Zammit, Paola
Mgr Charles Scicluna's timely abuse warning
Speaking at St Peter's Basilica in Rome during a Mass of reparation for abuse committed by priests, and for healing within the Church, Mgr Charles Scicluna, who is the Promoter of Justice in the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, said that if a member of the Church was an 'occasion of sin', then there was no other choice but to cut this tie. Mgr Scicluna was referring in particular to the great scandal caused by a paedophile priest.
He said 'cut this tie' because Christ himself told us: "If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off. It is better for you to enter (eternal) life maimed than to have two hands and to go to hell, to the unquenchable fire." (Mark 9, 43)
Besides, Church law is not reticent on such crimes. Discipline of the clergy for sexual offences is not new in the history of the Catholic Church, and canonical structures have long been in place to address the problem.
So, responding to the current crisis, Mgr Scicluna is rightly pointing to commitment to the rule of law as found in Canon law, thereby allowing injured individuals and communities to heal.
From the legal point of view, if paedophilia has been committed in Malta, only the Maltese criminal court can deal with it.
The alleged offender has the right to a lawyer. And only if convicted by the court of first instance, or second instance if he appeals, can be called a paedophile. In the meantime he is to be presumed innocent.
That is why, to date, there is no Maltese paedophile priest.
Popular Stories
In Discussion
20 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Joe Xuereb
Jun 11th 2010, 20:44
@ Dr.(NOT short for dear) Heavy-cross-to-bear, if you had enough of a sense of humour, you would have seen my quip about Flynn for the throwaway comment that it was. Now get off my Gay Carnival Float - you're not gay enough. Off! Begone! Look forward to the ultimate embrace! There's a happy doc. Altogether now. There's a happy doc.
No apologies for being incoherent(?). What a tactic! It makes one's ..... itch so it is dismissed as incoherent. Must remember that one. Of course it wouldn't work for me. I prefer the truth, and nothing but the truth, so help me....anybody there?..... and then move on.
That was serious. And on an even more serious note. Religion is an identity investment. When Malta becomes totally secular like all civilised countries, the heavily-invested will need to find another opium. As in 'one addiction replaces another' (although it doesn't have to be, naturally). Until that happens, the current investors will flap their wings like an unhappy, threatened 'ghasfur tal-bejt'(sparrow) in a tiny gagga(cage). Gasping for air.
Dr Francis Saliba
Jun 11th 2010, 23:45
@JoeXuereb
I thank you for explaining that some of your comments are "quips" and "throwaway comments" and there are others others that are intended to be "serious" or even "more serious" still. There is no discernible difference between them - except your say so. From now on I will assume that they are all written in jest as "throwaway comments" by someone who alternates between the denying the existence of even one God and the opposite extreme of showing gratitude to multiple "loving gods" and moreover who sees nothing wrong in being incoherent and not apologizing for it!
Joe Xuereb
Jun 10th 2010, 16:42
1) I find it ridiculous, and obscene, and quite disgusting, that people who were sexually abused by priests, men whom they and their parents trusted simply because they were priests - these priests should be brought to court as soon as possible. So that ridiculous apologists can no longer hide behind the 'theoretical legalese' innocent till guilty. We know that the non-ridiculous, those too astute to be banal, sense that the priests are guilty. The apologists prefer biding time - because the consequences of this evil, and how its been handled by an institution heavily-invested in its concealment, they want to put off that implosion for as long as possible. The game's up. Courts, forget your friends, priests - make the guilt official. For the victims' sake if nought else.
continued
Dr Francis Saliba
Jun 10th 2010, 20:19
@JoeXuereb
Careful please, you are verging on total incoherence. I would never dream of jumping on to any "Gay Carnival Float" and I certainly do not need "that platform to get at Flynn" - not when you yourself are so reckless as to drag him in by complaining that he is not there when you need him!
Joe Xuereb
Jun 10th 2010, 15:46
2) I''s ridiculous to be biased against one's abuser? Of course I'm not prepared to drag myself through the courts. I turned out to be the man my mother warned me against - albeit one who responds emotionally and physically to other hairy men and not kids. I work through, and continue to, my demons, my human condition. It is my privilege to do this (some are too chicken to even consider starting so they want to drag us queers with them. Fat chance!)
It's exciting and I'm coming up smelling sweet. Priests ain't so lucky. Such is forbidden them, many falling through the net. Dragging down duped innocents.
@ Saliba. What gives you the right to jump - as if! - onto my Gay Carnival Float and use it as a platform to get at Flynn? He who's downunder admiring skipping joeys in the park while contemplating gems of wisdom, his own personal observations, not quoting and spouting nonsense from millennial rags that get more and more beyond restoration every day (gay days are optional - we have free will, non?! - as long as gratitude is shown to loving gods who excercise THEIR free will.
Dr Francis Saliba
Jun 10th 2010, 20:40
@JoeXuereb.
Beg your pardon, Sir, are you the same Xuereb who prided himself to be an atheist admirer of Dawking? How come that now you are writing "as long as gratitude is shown to loving gods"? Have you jumped from one extreme to the other?
Joe Zammit
Jun 7th 2010, 22:48
No convicted Maltese paedophile priest = no Maltese paedophile priest because if no one has been convicted to date, every Maltese priest has every right to be considered innocent.
Steve Pace
Jun 9th 2010, 16:23
Joe, sorry to burst your bubble once more. The church response team found FOUR MALTESE PRIESTS GUILTY .
Joe Xuereb
Jun 7th 2010, 20:48
@ Joe Zammit. You have said this so many times I lost count (ie. innocent until proven guilty). Every time you refuse to be drawn into the scandal (and the undermining of church authority) that all this entails and will continue to. A very weak argument given that the accusations are somewhat stronger than mere allegations. And I, shrewd cock that I am, know the reason why. If you homed in on the scandal and its implication, you and what you stand for would be turned on your head. Now that wouldn't do. In your situation I would probably behave in exactly the same way. Be true to yourself Joe. You must not waver if you are to save your skin
Where's Flynn when I need him?
Don't forget now. Innocent until proven guilty does not wash in this instance. Those who are guilty, they know who they are, they should be men enough to resign their cloth, thus reducing the agony all around. Many priests do sterling work and for them to be men is not a big deal. Even when, in a misguided moment of weakness, they ruin children's lives.
When's the court-case coming up? It's overdue surely.
Dr Francis Saliba
Jun 8th 2010, 12:00
In short, as far as you are concerned, an exception should be made in the case of priests, and only because they are priests. They are to be considered convicted and guilty as charges as soon as an accusing figure is pointed at them! Don't you feel a teeny-weeny bit ridiculously biased?
Dr Francis Saliba
Jun 9th 2010, 05:33
“Where's Flynn when I need him?” (Cry for help from JoeXuereb)
Let me guess! He is still searching, without success, in back issues of The Times for some evidence in support for his fabrication that I had ever made “"Excuses, more excuses, legal small print, 1001 reasons why priests shouldn't be reported to police, apologist crap."
Steve Pace
Jun 7th 2010, 14:08
@Joe Zammit - "there is no Maltese paedophile priest" ... Correction. there is no convicted Maltese paodophile priest .
"In a new twist to the Maltese case of clerical abuse that has swept across the Maltese and international media over the last two weeks in the lead up to yesterday’s arrival of Pope Benedict XVI, the Ontario Provincial Police said on Thursday that it has reopened its case against Fr Godwin Scerri."
source http://www.independent.com.mt/news.asp?newsitemid=104775
Let's wait and see ... We are at an age where Malta seems to have a lot of first timers .
Dr Francis Saliba
Jun 7th 2010, 19:43
@StevePace.
1) "Correction. there is no convicted Maltese paodophile priest . " (StevePace)
2) An accused person is to be presumed innocent unless he is found guilty by a court of law.
3) Ergo - a priest accused of being a pedophile is to be considered innocent until the contrary is proved.
Please do everyone a favour. Do not distort my comment into something totally different such as one claiming that there are no pedophile priests. In my opinion it is reasonable to assume that the priesthood, like all other trades and professions, unfortunately would harbour some rotten apples in their ranks - but I do not blame the aggrieved societies themselves for the sins of their members.
Joe Zammit
Jun 7th 2010, 22:56
Steve, so you agree that to date there is no Maltese paedophile priest. The case of the one you have cited is still sub iudice. You cannot name and shame anyone! To date we have only ALLEGATIONS! Do you want me to tell people that Steve Pace is paedophile? Even if I tell the whole of Malta, once you are not convicted, YOU ARE NOT PAEDOPHILE and you have a right to your innocence!
Steve Pace
Jun 9th 2010, 16:07
THE CHURCH RESPONSE TEAM FOUND FOUR MALTESE PRIESTS GUILTY . THEY HAVE BEEN EITHER DEFROCKED OR REMOVED FROM ..... READ AGAIN SALIBA / ZAMMIT . THE FACT THAT THEY HAVE NOT BE FOUND GUILTY IN CRIMINIAL COURTS IS ONLY DUE TO THE PROTECTION GIVEN TO THEM .
SALIBA ...Please do everyone a favour. Do not distort my comment into something totally different such as one claiming that there are no pedophile priests .
Dr Francis Saliba
Jun 11th 2010, 11:39
@StevePace
Please do not run out of breath after reading the first part of my comment - read all of it, more than once if necessary, with perseverance you may understand it, eventually!
John Shuster
Jun 6th 2010, 17:33
There are many priests and church officials who have sexually abused the innocent in Malta. The Roman Catholic Church is very powerful in Malta and the survivors of sex abuse have not been given a safe opportunity to publicly accuse their abusers. That day will come as all of Europe more deeply understands that the Vatican has played on their good will and fooled them for decades. Portugal is in the same situation. The truth will come out and justice will be served because of the courage of survivors. The sexual abuse of children are crimes that can only be resolved in a court of law. They are not just sins that church officials can dismiss and escape only to hurt more children.
Joe Zammit
Jun 6th 2010, 19:30
John, so you are agreeing that to date there is no Maltese paedophile priest because, as you have said, no Maltese criminal court has convicted any.
Dr Francis Saliba
Jun 6th 2010, 20:18
Take your rightful place in the queu of anti-clerics who believe that the Catholic priests must be assumed to be guilty as soon as an accused finger is pointed at them, that they are not innocent as long as they are not found guilty by a court of law and who untruthfully claim that "the survivors of sex abuse have not been given a safe opportunity to publicly accuse their abusers" in our courts of law.
Joseph Calleja
Jun 6th 2010, 16:25
That is why, to date, there is no Maltese pedophile priest. That statement is as true like when the Iranian President Mahmud Ahmadinejad said there are no gay people in Iraq. Do you really believe that? Why did the Pope sit down with the eight abused men. Because you don't see something it doesn't mean it's not there.
If you are trying to disassociate yourself from Fr Farrugia, you are doing wrong. He is still innocent (yeah right), he is still Maltese and he is still a priest. There are no pedophile priests in Malta. I wonder how many people believe that?