Bishop Lahey accused of sexually abusing boy

Up to now, we had only heard of Bishop Lahey being charged with possession and importing child pornography.  But now, a man has come forward claiming that Bishop Lahey sexually assaulted him many times in the early 1980s when he was between 9 and 13 years old.  Read the story here.

I personally think that there is a link between child porn and pedophilia.  I've read stories about convicted pedophiles who admit that child porn was a driver of their addiction.  

Keep in mind that none of these accusations against Bishop Lahey have been proven in court.  Of course, the accusations could be false, a clever scheme of an opportunist seeking to cash-in on the current scandals.  But these days, I'm not inclined to put blind faith in any clergyman. 


.

Lahey child porn case to resume April 9

When this case finally goes to trial, I hope we can learn more about what accomplices Archbishop Lahey may have had within the Church to keep his little secret under the radar. We should also find out more about revelations that Archbishop Penney of St. John's was warned about Lahey 20 years ago.

These are sad times for the Church in Canada.  But the truth must be known.

.

The truth about priests

Here is an excellent article published on MacLean's web site. I found it very balanced and down to earth. It talks about the horrible sexual abuses committed by too many priests over the years. It offers a very compassionate discussion of the immense suffering that the victims have undergone. It sympathizes with the contempt that good priests now have to face because of the sins of their brothers. But the article points to a truth that is too often overlooked and that needs to be repeated:

But at the risk of downplaying decades of unspeakable abuse—or forgiving a Church hierarchy that moved heaven and earth to suppress scandal and protect criminal clergy—an obvious point is often ignored: the vast, vast majority of Catholic priests are not sexual predators. In fact, the scientific research suggests that men who target children are no more pervasive in the priesthood (and perhaps less pervasive) than in any other segment of society. Depending on the study, somewhere between two and four per cent of priests have had sexual contact with a minor. Or, to put it another way, between 96 and 98 per cent have not.

“It’s part of that myth—the myth of the pedophile priest who can’t help himself,” says Thomas Plante, a psychology professor at Santa Clara University who has published dozens of studies about sexually abusive priests. “It’s really an issue of perception rather than reality. Believe it or not, probably the safest place for a kid to be is in a Catholic church environment.”

My only reservation with this article is that it tends to use the term "pedophile" to describe these priests who abuse children. Later they say that a more accurate term would be "ephebophiles,": which means "people

Did Archbishop Lahey admit homosexual attractions?

The Globe and Mail published an article today on the latest developments in the accusations of child pornography against Archbishop Raymond Lahey.

I won't comment on whether he's guilty or innocent. I'll let the courts decide.  I just want to flag one sentence in the article:

He is alleged to have told one officer he is attracted to young men, aged 20 or 21, and that he had never done anything abusive to a child and would “never have any sexual interest in a person under 18.”

.

Canadian bishops being too self-flattering over Lahey scandal?

I read this article in the Globe and Mail today entitled "Church vocal in face of scandal".  Here are some quotes that caught my attention.   

This time – with the disgrace of former bishop Raymond Lahey drenching the news media – the hierarchy of Canada's Roman Catholic Church has not stayed silent.

In what one senior church official on Thursday called a light-years' shift from a generation ago, bishops have preached in their cathedrals and written open letters about their anger and disgust with Rev. Lahey and the child pornography charges he faces.

The national Catholic television station Salt and Light TV has devoted much of its blog to the story. And the Pope's representative in Canada this week told theology students in Toronto that the Canadian church had been wounded.

(...)

The Canadian bishops were the first in the world to institute protocols, Father Rosica said. It placed them far ahead of the U.S. church and fostered a climate of transparency, rigorous investigation and instant suspension for suspected wrongdoing. Except, as the papal nuncio told theology students, the destructive power of sin can't be underestimated.

First of all, I'm very happy that the Canadian bishops have been so vocal in denouncing Archbishop Lahey's actions.  This is another sad episode in the history of our Church, but the truth must be known and dealt with. There would have been no point in denying it or minimizing it.

What bugs me is that the bishops have started patting themselves on the back over how awesomely they have dealt with this issue.  Their tone is quite triumphalist, at a time when there is nothing to be triumphant about.  We just caught an Archbishop using child porn!  Not to mention that it wasn't the bishops who brought this man to justice, but rather the police who did an excellent job.  I think the bishops' attitude is severely misplaced and very premature.  New facts about this case are still emerging.  This is a time of repentance, investigation and accountability, not a time for self-flattery. 

This is particularly true in light of the new revelations that Lahey's child pornography behaviour was known by another priest and bishop 20 years ago! 

Indeed, in the National Post, we read that Father Kevin Molloy learned about Lahey's behaviour in 1989.  He confronted Lahey and told him to stop these sinful deeds.  He also alerted Archbishop Alphonsus Penney, who was the proper ecclesiastical authority at the time.  Archbishop Penney has not spoken to the media yet concerning the Lahey scandal, so we don't know exactly what measures, if any, were taken against Lahey in 1989.  But one thing is certain: Lahey's child pornography habits were obviously not overcome at that time and it would have been horribly imprudent to let him continue his ministry in that condition.  Archbishop Penney owes us a darn good explanation.  Until then, the bishops would be advised to hold off on their self-congratulation. 

The same article in the National Post says that Lahey allegedly was in the habit of bringing some boys into his home on weekends, back in the 1980s.  That's where some boys found the child pornography.

This raises the obvious question:  why was Lahey allowed to continue in his functions for another 20 years after being exposed?  

Keep in mind that 1989 was not so long ago.  Our understanding of sexual deviancy had improved a lot since the 1950s or 1960s.  Disciplinary actions for sexual deviancy in the clergy should have been stronger.

So while normal Catholics are still in shock and seeking accountability, the bishops are congratulating themselves in one of Canada's national newspapers.  How does that make you feel?  I'm concerned that the Canadian bishops are more worried about their public appearance over this scandal than in addressing the substance of the issue.  Dealing with the issue of sexual deviancy in the clergy is difficult and requires great sacrifice.  It's a lot easier to focus on the PR.  But we can't let them be content with a PR campaign.  We need some answers and accountability. 

Reading the quote from Fr. Rosica above, you'd almost think that the Canadian Church has it all figured out and that sexual scandals are a thing of the past.  Well, no.  The fact that an Archbishop can still fall through the cracks tells me that there is much work left to do.  We need the bishops to tell us what concrete measures they will implement to prevent this from happening again. 

Is this a sign of more things to come from the CCCB's revamped communications strategy?  I sure hope not. 

Please pray for our bishops.