The double jeopardy of abuse victims

How is this for an example of double jeopardy reported in today's Edmonton Journal?


First jeopardy. A Quebec priest, Paul-Henri Lachance, betrayed the trust of a young girl and her family and abused the girl, Shirley Christensen now 36, over a period of two years between the ages of six and eight. He pled guilty in 2009 and was sentenced to 18 months jail.

Second jeopardy. Christensen's parents informed the archbishop after their daughter confided in them. The Archbishop told them Lachance would be dealt with and not to disclose the information to others. Being good and obedient Catholics they did what the archbishop told them. As an adult Christenson tried to sue the Archdiocese of Quebec City as being responsible for Lachance and turning a blind eye after the allegations were brought to the attention of the archbishop. The same archdioces that traded on the parents' trust and instructed them not to disclose the information dismissed the lawsuit on the grounds that more than three years had passed since the alleged abuse.

Hello? Is anyone listening out there in the presbyteries and bishop's residences? Please can we have some actions to give credibility to the Pope's words to the Irish victims of abuse and their families?

"You have suffered grievously and I am truly sorry. I know that nothing can undo the wrong you have endured. Your trust has been betrayed and your dignity has been violated. Many of you found that, when you were courageous enough to speak of what happened to you, no one would listen. Those of you who were abused in residential institutions must have felt that there was no escape from your sufferings. It is understandable that you find it hard to forgive or be reconciled with the Church. In her name, I openly express the shame and remorse that we all feel." (Letter to the Church in Ireland)


The first betrayal of trust can be put down to the depraved human weakness of an individual priest. The detached, calculating meanness of the second betrayal is, in my eyes, the greater scandal because, apart from making a mockery of the Pope's apology, it denies or invalidates the pain/anger/shame/guilt/humiliation that abuse victims have carried with them ever since their abuse first began. In effect, this woman has been victimised yet again. As the Pope said, it is understandable if she finds it hard to forgive or be reconciled with the Church.

Clearly, the Pope does not have a handle on the feelings of all his bishops when he speaks about "the shame and remorse that we all feel." There are at least some who do not feel enough shame and remorse as to act on it.

Perceptions of the Roman Catholic Church

Curious about how atheists underpin morals and ethics I read an interview in the Globe and Mail with Sam Harris who has just written a book on the subject. I did not expect him to be sympathetic to religion and he lived down to my expectations. However, one of the things that he said about the Catholic Church made me sit up and take notice.

"Here is an institution that is more concerned about preventing contraception than preventing child rape."

This resonated with me because I have heard exactly this from practising Catholics loyal to the Church. I have often wondered about what perception the world must have of the relative importance in the eyes of the Roman Catholic hierarchy of something like contraception compared with the paedophile behaviour of priests who were reassigned many times over into situations which, in spiritual terminology, were "occasions of sin" for the priests and, more importantly, occasions of danger for children. What is the message that the Church has given to the on-looking world when it comes to the relative amounts of money that have been spent to buy silence, on out of court settlements, court-imposed settlements, lawyers' fees and the like compared to unfettered, no-strings-attached, gratuitous offers to pay for treatment and counselling for traumatised victims?

Please understand that what I am talking about here is perception. There is no shortage of apologists who will tell me that the reality is different and, of course, the hierarchy is very concerned. Didn't the Pope meet with victims, more than once? Haven't there been documents and statements from episcopal conferences? Maybe, but for perception to change there needs to be more than isolated events such as these. The perception remains that the Church is more concerned about preventing contraception than preventing child rape. Indeed, the perception is that the Church is straining out the gnat but swallowing a camel (Mat 23:24).

There is no perception that the Church hierarchy is genuinely interested, in an on-going way, to seek out and help victims of paedophile priests. The perception is that the cover-up continues to this day.

I was very pleased, even excited, when one parish of my acquaintence added to the Prayer of the Faithful during Sunday mass a prayer "for those who have been sexually abused as children by ministers of the Church." To my disappointment it was a once-off event and has not been repeated.

It seems to me that the leaders of the Catholic Church are not trying very hard to change these perceptions. Just how important is attending to victims and their healing relative to other priorities in the Roman Catholic Church today?