I hope that Anthony Foster and his family, who intend to confront Pope Benedict XVI and Cardinal George Pell in Sydney this week over the Catholic Church’s treatment of their late daughter, Emma Foster, who took her own life in January and her sister Katie, both of whom were raped as primary school children by Father Kevin O’Donnell, aren’t dismissed as “Catholic bashing” and raining on the World Youth Day parade or subjected to victim blaming as Anthony Jones was. Foster told the tragic tale of his daughters’ abuse and how it marked their lives horrendously for the worse, and probably brought Emma’s life to a close, on Lateline tonight.
The Archbishop of Melbourne at the time the Fosters sought justice was George Pell. Pell apologised for O’Donnell’s actions and offered $50 000 in compensation as part of Pell’s version of the Towards Healing process - a process funded by the Catholic Church’s insurer. The Fosters were advised that this was inadequate, and sought recourse through the courts. Lawyers for the Catholic Archdiocese fought them for eight years before reaching a settlement, denying that Pell had made any admissions and at one point denying that O’Donnell had caused any harm to the girls, despite Pell’s letter to Emma in 1998 which conceded what had occurred. All the Fosters are asking for is that the Church take responsibility for the actions of its ministers, act as a model litigant, and cease to tie victims up in lengthy and expensive legal proceedings. It’s reasonable to bring these claims to public notice at a time when they have the best chance of making an impact. They should be treated justly, and on their merits, and not turned into a political football. Foster correctly says apologies are meaningless unless the Church accepts responsibility and treats victims justly.
NB: More detail on O’Donnell’s history of abuse, and the impact on Emma and Katie Foster and their family, and the Church’s response at the Broken Rites website.
Update: Lateline now has the video of tonight’s story and the interview between Tony Jones and Anthony Foster, and transcripts to follow.
Anthony Foster responds to Bishop Fisher:
Mr Foster said he had no negative feeling towards World Youth Day, but hoped the Pope would show more compassion than Bishop Fisher.
“The church can’t claim to speak with any authority to society about how it should behave when the church can’t behave properly and morally with its own victims,” he said.
“We entrusted the Catholic system to look after our daughters and they betrayed us terribly, and continued to betray us by treating us so badly and other victims so badly.”
Elsewhere: A comprehensive post, incorporating recent developments, at Catholic blog Whispers in the Loggia.
Update: Lateline now has the video of tonight’s story and the interview between Tony Jones and Anthony Foster, and transcripts to follow.
Tough stuff wasnt it?
The bloke gave me a new insight into the meaning of the word “crucifixion”. And I got the Hardies asbestos analogy.
I was stunned. I knew priestly abuse was bad - but this!
George Pell, on this evidence, is not fit to be Australia’s Cardinal. It is inconcieveable he did not know. Nobody could be that naive. The Pope should sack him immediately. (And maybe he will. He seems a nice old bloke. I like him a lot better than JP2, on present evidence.)
Yes, it’s a horrendous story.
The thing, Paul, though is that Pell did know, tried to fob them off with compensation under his scheme, and then instructed the lawyers to defend the action against the Archdiocese “vigorously” which included subsequent denials that anything had occurred and almost a decade of legal maneouvring.
Oh, Mark, this is terrible. And they wonder why people lose their faith. (Was intellectual + a combination of Sunday morning laziness with me, though.)
Just terrible. What a trail of damage the old bastard left behind. And the suggestion that he may have been kept on because of his fund-raising abilities reminds of how churches can sell their souls for moolah.
Was so moved listening to Anthony Foster last night. He was beautifully spoken. His pain so evident. Yes, the Catholic Church should beg forgiveness from the victims of clergy sexual abuse. Their response on this issue has been appalling, and makes a total mockery of their attempts to give moral instruction.
I found the lawyer’s comments interesting.
Sounds like the poor girl had the devil’s own job in trying to sue for damages. They obviously made it as hard as possible for her.
Perhaps the One Holy Roman and Apostolic Church should be re-named The Catholic Church (No Liability) Inc., (possibly incorporated somewhere, perhaps Rome, but certainly not here); Or perhaps: The Catholic Church: That Which Does Not Exist, Does Not Employ Anyone (especially Priests) And Cannot Be Liable Vicariously For Any Wrongdoing.
According to a catholic bishop though the complaints of Emma’s father are just “dwelling crankily … on old wounds”.
That statement, IMO, says a lot about the catholic church and their attitude to abuse and none of it is good. They do neither the victims nor the church any favours with their attitude.
So, has the Prime Minister called it revolting yet?
Pollytickedoff - what that bishop said was clearly not appropriate and I’m guessing he’s been sent back for more media training. If he’d just left out that specific sentence I think he would have been fine - eg talking about making the processes better, willingness to meet with victims etc.
By the same token, the Catholic Church is not always averse to seeking redress through the civil courts.
http://www.cathnews.com/news/109/09.php
By the same token, perhaps the Catholic Church has greater respect for Liberian justice than it has for Australian justice.
And if so, then maybe the Church has a point.
Crikey on the Church’s (lack of) reaction:
“If he’d just left out that specific sentence I think he would have been fine”
The rest of what he said was fairly reasonable however that phrase totally undermined the church’s claims of taking such abuse seriously by minimising the effects abuse can have on the victims and infers an attitude that the victims are to blame for their suffering due to “crankily dwelling” on the harm done.
In this case the harm done is horrendous, as he could easily have found out.
Anthony Foster responds:
What dignity Anthony Foster has… and such a contrast from the Carbrook paedophile scare last week. (Although I wonder how “dwelling crankily” would have gone down in a community meeting.)
It’s a very sad story. The legacy of culures which make sex inherently shameful is clearly nefarious. The really bitter epilogue is that these kids would be condemned to Hell according to the ultra-orthodox - for suicide.
.
Paul of Tarsus, sir. You were a son of a bitch and it’d be better if you’d stayed home ’stead of going to Damascus. It just ain’t right.
.
Still the Church holds its power. My brother’s been hassled by certain memebers of my extended family for not having his kids baptized. “Why not?” they say. “Oh let me count the ways.”
There is a solution to this appalling state of affairs. No-win-no-fee professional costs agreements, common in the USA, but in general banned in Australia.
In NSW for example
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/lpa2004179/s325.html
LEGAL PROFESSION ACT 2004 - SECT 325
Contingency fees are prohibited
325 Contingency fees are prohibited
(1) A law practice must not enter into a costs agreement under which the amount payable to the law practice, or any part of that amount, is calculated by reference to:
(b) the amount of any award or settlement or the value of any property that may be recovered in any proceedings to which the agreement relates.
Maximum penalty: 100 penalty units. [$110 x 100 = $11000 plus a professional misconduct charge–potential loss of practising certificate]
(2) Subsection (1) does not apply to the extent that the costs agreement adopts an applicable fixed costs provision.
That’s the way to spike the legal guns of “non-model” (obfuscating) defendant/litigant corporations and other similar entities, like the Catholic church.
In criminal matters the state balances its power for prosecution by putting the onus of proof on itself and the burden of proof “beyond reasonable doubt”. In civil matters, while the burden of proof is reduced to “on the balance of probabilities” there is no equivalent “Legal Aid” for financially poor people, giving an unfair advantage in so many cases to the richer litigant. No win no fee would go a long way to negate that advantage, so I’ll leave readers to decide for themselves why or legislators, in their wisdom, forbid it.
“…..Or perhaps: The Catholic Church: That Which Does Not Exist, Does Not Employ Anyone (especially Priests) And Cannot Be Liable Vicariously For Any Wrongdoing.”
Evan, from what I heard of a legal eagle, who specialises in this area of sexual abuse, THAT is precisely how the organisation holds up its protective cloak, in legal sphere.
Coupled, obviously, with an alternative ‘in house’ financial arrangement and “healing” if one is suitably compliant.
“crankily dwelling in the past”
that has to be up there with the Sheik’s revolting “uncovered meat” simile last year; or GG Hollingworth’s “it was quite the other way around”; or Cardinal Pell’s various excuses.
I’m no expert, but it sounded - how to put this? - a little un-Christian.
If there are many such cases then Herr Ratzinger has his work cut out for him this week. Even if there’s only one case, the eloquent and quietly determined family will carry the prayers of many humanitarians with them as they seek justice.
Go, Ratzi !!!
They attempt to go to all that trouble so that protesters can’t ‘annoy’ the pilgrims, but it is the internal crises like these that are doing the real damage to the Church’s reputation. And certainly in this case they deserve much of the criticism being generated.
Word, Rayedish!
Ps - Ambi, spot on. But because *News Limited* are “sponsoring” WYD, we won’t hear a peep. Props to Tony Jones and the Lateline crew here. This stuff needs to be aired, and I hope that Bishop Fisher and his merry men aren’t allowed to get away with saying “oh he’s just a cranky dude”. I think Bishop Fisher should try to empathise.
What would that Jesus dude have to say about all this?
I don’t think it would be “let’s wave flags and sing hymns”…
The one individual more tragic than Foster and his no doubt endlessly suffering wife, would be this lipidsaturated, mindless, callous blob, Bishop Fisher.
Surely, to be extant at Fisher’s level is just that, not “alive” in any meaningful human sense, at all!
Although, after watching Latteline also interviewing that klutz that passes for the opposition environment spokescreature and Wayne Duck with his inanities, even Bishop Fisher has competition at this primordial alimentary level.
[The one individual more tragic than Foster and his no doubt endlessly suffering wife, would be this lipidsaturated, mindless, callous blob, Bishop Fisher.]
I believe Bishop Fisher’s former occupationb before koining the priesthood was as a solicitor, meaning he should know better.
[Bishop Anthony Fisher OP
Auxiliary Bishop of Sydney, Coordinator World Youth Day 2008
Episcopal Vicar for Life and Health, Parish Priest of Watsons Bay
Most Rev Anthony Fisher OP, DD, BA (Hons), LLB, BTheol (Hons), DPhil, is a friar of the Order of Preachers (’Dominicans’) and Titular Bishop of Buruni. He was born in 1960 and is the youngest Catholic bishop in Australia.
Bishop Fisher is presently the Parish Priest of Our Lady Star of the Sea Parish in Watson’s Bay.
He studied in the University of Sydney for six years, where he received an honours degree in History and a Law degree before practicing law in a city firm in Sydney. From this time he was also involved in various pro-life groups.
In 1985 he entered the Dominicans - a religious order dedicated to preaching the Catholic faith in the context of a life of study, prayer and community. He studied for the priesthood in Melbourne, receiving an honours degree in theology. He worked for a time at Uniya, a centre for social research in Kings Cross, on immigration and refugee issues, and at Holy Name Parish in Wahroonga, Sydney. He was ordained a priest in Sydney on 14 September 1991. ]
http://www.wyd2008.org/index.php/en/about_wyd08/corporate_profile/executive_team__1
All of which demonstrates, Frank, is that brains and education are no insurance against crass ignorance and boorishness.
Watson’s Bay and a lawyer, eh?
Explains much, doesn’t it?
Your fairly thorough bio-pic had me wondering if, like a lot of over over educated people, he ever lived in the real world.
Seriously Frank- I read your posts and know you are a fairly bright bloke. It’s not catholic-bashing to be appalled atsome of what’s been on the teev just recently, is it?
Anthony Foster responds to Bishop Fisher:
Here’s a 2002 Richard Carleton interview with a victim who knew Pell as a kid, the abuser was his uncle and Pell’s ex-flat mate and according to this interview Pell tried to buy him off, and at the end, an interview with the Foster family who are still waiting for a proper repsonse from the Church.
http://www.toowoombapressreleases.com/?id=123188
Denis Ferguson must be wondering why he just didn’t join the priesthood.
Elsewhere: A comprehensive post, incorporating recent developments, at Catholic blog Whispers in the Loggia.
I guess it’s more confrontational when a person in a position of power like a priest molests a kid - but has anyone seen any evidence that priests are more likely to be abusers than any other profession?
Not that I’m defending the church or the church’s handling of this situation - but I do think the ‘catholic-bashing’ is out of order. I’m athiest myself - and dislike most religions (mine is better than yours - and you’re going to hell) but I was in Sydney this week and its great to see all the young folk gathering to celebrate… well… joy? Let them have their party.
They can have their party - obviously, and with much assistance from the state.
But your inference is of course that these pesky, irritating and really quite annoying victims should just keep quiet for the duration, and let these youngsters enjoy their party in sweet ignorance of the reality of the church that they follow. Well piffle and bollocks to that!
Not that you’re defending the church or anything.
To Anthony and Chrissie Foster, Katherine and Emma (Rest her Soul):
My humblest and most profound apologies for the incredibly inappropriate and hurtful comments of those attempting to protect their own (ineffective) religious convictions.
Your pain and continual action to have this matter appropriately (at any level - humanitarian, religious, moral, etc) investigated represents true justice and is commended by many, many more - the vast majority - who represent the real world in which we currently live. May you succeed!
Warmest Regards,
Christine
Hear, hear Christine.
Ambi, almost at a loss for words
That’s not the point, though. The point is that the Catholic Church is far more likely than other institutions that have inadvertently employed a paedophile to deny that any abuse took place and to continue to place the abuser in a position of trust and authority over vulnerable young people. It is documented that in many cases the Church has simply moved an abuser on to pastures new again and again and again, with no warning to the new congregation that the abuser should not be trusted alone with children.
It is the Church’s response to paedophilic priests that is inadequate and needs to be changed. I suggest that the reason that they have failed to change it is the ever-growing shortage of men taking up priestly vocations around the world - they simply don’t feel that they can afford to lose a man sanctified to perform Mass in the current situation.
Of course, if they opened up the priesthood to married men, or to women, they wouldn’t have a shortage of ordained people who could perform Mass, and then they could respond to instances of paedophilia more robustly. It’s not going to happen with the current lot of conservatives dominating the Council of Cardinals though.
tigtog - are there recent (say last 10 years) cases of the Catholic church moving on abusers to other areas?
I’m just a bit skeptical of the theory that its done because of the lack of priests, rather than the more boring explanation of an organisation trying to cover up a scandal with the minimum of fuss which we see all the time with other religious or secular organisations.
Chris, I believe that the Church has finally learnt the futility of their earlier approach, and no longer move abusers on to other direct ministry congregations, finding them instead a position in large offices with little or no interaction with Catholic families. This appears to have happened without openly acknowledging and apologising for the earlier move-em-on procedure.
My suggestion that the shortage of priests worldwide motivates certain responses to instances of abusive priests (and not just paedophiles) is merely an attempt to explain why the Catholic Church seems to have a a higher number of these cover-up accusations than other religious or secular organisations. I posit it as an added motivation to the usual cover-up instinct that most organisations have in response to a scandal.
Chris, WYD is largly about recruitment for the various religious orders.
It is getting very difficult to find educated folks, in affluent countries, who are prepared to pretend they can just sit on the ol’ sex urge.
The suffering bought about through abuse by paedophiles can spoil lives and cause pain for many many decades. There must be so many Australians feeling furious at the comments made by Bishop Fisher: they do not choose to continue suffering: the trauma of abuse, perhaps as a very small child, is not easily overcome.
Sorry Bishop Fisher. Some people are looking beyond the gathering of young Catholics as they feel very let down by the churches.
Father Chris Riley won’t be on Cardinal Pell & Bishop Fishor’s Xmas Card list this year.
[THE Catholic Church should scrap its program to investigate sex abuse within the church because victims have been denied justice, a maverick Sydney priest says.
Father Chris Riley, who heads Youth Off The Streets, a Sydney welfare service that assists homeless, drug addicted and abused young people, said the Towards Healing program hurt the church’s credibility and meant victims often did not have their day in court.
He told the Nine Network tonight that any family confronted with sexual abuse should go straight to the police and have the matter dealt with in court.
“Towards Healing, to me, I have to say, is a joke,” he said.
“The perpetrator is the only winner there because often they are not charged, because it (the case) is settled.
“This is obscene, settling those sort of cases behind closed doors,” Father Riley said.
“It should be out in the court, and then if they (victims) want to deal with the church, we then do that after the person is … found guilty, and my position is, jailed for a long time.
“Then, if they want to go to the church, let’s heal them then, but get justice first.”
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,24036050-5005361,00.html
Tigtog - agreed that they haven’t apologised sufficiently (well how much is enough anyway!) and stories of abuse and the effects of it are going to keep popping up for a few years yet, so continuing to apologise is going to be needed in the future regardless.
The Catholic church has clearly had a lot of problems in the past and is still struggling with the results of it now. And comments like the bishop made demonstrate they still have a long way to go.
I’m still rather skeptical that a shortage of priests has been a reason to cover up, but I doubt there is any way to prove that theory right or wrong. As a person who is not Catholic, I don’t feel its really appropriate for non Catholics to tell them how to run their church beyond legal requirements (eg they should accept female priests). I think its up to people within the church to make those changes or leave if they can’t - plenty of religions to choose from. Its not like the pope can any longer order your execution if you decide to start a breakaway church.
joe2 - agreed that a big part of WYD is a recruitment exercise - they have been very open about it - the world today program had interviews with church members saying they were actively looking for new nuns and priests. And young people going through the expo were saying they were checking out what possibilities there are for them.
Frank - I agree with the comment that these should be handled by the police and the criminal courts and then after that is settled then civil side handled either through the civil courts or a church process if both parties agree. Its a criminal justice matter and should be handled as such
We should not have two justice systems in the country, and bypassing the government system to use a church run one makes as much sense as the indigenous people, islamic people or jewish people having their own legal system in Australia.
First of all I would like to extend my strong sympathy to the Foster family, as an ex-catholic who has seen his primary school friend being destroyed by priestly sexual abuse I fully understand how they feel.
Thay are owed a hell of a lot more than just an apology, the Church should humbly ask the family for forgiveness for the crimes perpetrated against their children.
Then this ‘bishop’ Anthony Fisher comes out with his comments. He’s not fit to hold any public office, no matter how the spin doctors try to ‘fix’ his image.
It’s all about the root of all evil: money, or rather the illusion of money. Can you imagine the consequences for The Vatican if they apologise, it’ll cost them……
The current clergy involved have their heads up their asses and have lost all credibilty by showing more interest in politics than their flock, at least for me.
I would suggest they better drink tea with their ‘illuminati’ & Bilderberger friends……….
I know that most priests are honest, well intended & hardworking people, people like Father Reilly, Mother Theresa & numerous more anonymus priests, who are not in it for a carreer in the Vatican or the limelight but are trying to be better people & lead by example.
I still retain my strong faith in the God the Creator, but the worldly Church? Thanks but no thanks, I’d rather go to the circus, it’s more entertaining.
I dunno Tigtog, is a sexual predator really truly sanctified to perform Mass? Particularly since he has broken his vow of celibacy. I would have thought God would have a thing or two to say about it.
And speaking of dwelling on old wounds: doesn’t that cross they insist on carting around with them have something to do with ancient wounds.
Zoot, I use “sanctified” to signify a worldly status granted by the Church, as I think you fully realise
I would agree that any God worth worshipping and longing for would have a thing or two to say about sexual predators being dignified with a “sanctified” status.
I’d also like to see a few more questions asked about the Church’s stance on family planning, seeing that it’s the 40th anniversary of the Papal Encyclical Humanae Vitae next week:
Thanks tigtog,
a good program on ABC radio, and interesting that Anne Henderson and Morag Fraser described so bluntly how everday Catholics in Australia simply rejected that encyclical.
Last night I was struck (on Q&A) how Angela Shanahan had a similarly sharp attitude towards recent faults of the RC hierarchy, in not responding humanely to real (or alleged) victims of sexual abuse by priests. She said that the least Pope Benedict could do with the bereved father of Emma Foster was to kneel before him. Just for starters.
When we hear pronouncements from Cardinals & Bishops, it’s too easy (I think) to forget that many Church members may be feeling similar repugnance, to that which we feel.
Angela Shanahan’s words seemed closer to the message of the Nazarene teacher Jesus, than those from some other Aussie Catholics in recent weeks.
But I’m not an expert.
I came in at the end of Q&A and Angela Shanahan struck me as being very odd.
tigtog, I don’t think it’s so much about needing to maintain the limited number of priests - it’s more a complete reflexive defence of the institution above all else shaped by a very totalising institutional culture.
As to whether priests who have committed crimes can validly celebrate mass, the answer is yes. The Donatist heresy in 4th century Roman Africa - which St Augustine was at great pains to attack - held that only priests who had a pure life could validly function as such. The Catholic view is that the morality of the minister of the sacraments has no effect on the efficacy of those sacraments because they work according to God’s promises. What is required is the “correct intention” - that is to say, to intend to do what the Church does in celebrating mass, performing a baptism, etc. Catholic priests, incidentally, can’t really be “defrocked” because ordination is a sacrament which confers an “indelible mark on the soul”. They can be refused permission to function as priests, but they’re still priests.
There was a report last week in Brisbane of a priest who’d done a year’s gaol for multiple offences of sexual assault saying an early mass at the Marist Bros’ chapel on a regular basis. The Marist Bros pointed out - in their defence as parents at the adjacent school were upset - that the priest in question couldn’t see the school swimming pool from the chapel window. Aarrgghhh!
Is what they did so bad? As long as he doesn’t have contact with children and is supervised near the school, then if saying mass is something that helps reform him and not reoffend (and they claimed it helped him), then why not allow it? It may be easier for an organisation to shun offenders, but once they have served their time in prison they do have to live somewhere.
It has been shown that if you remove community support from child abusers then they are more likely to reoffend. Or we could try the other approach of running them out of every place they try to live in, isolate them from society and assemble lynch mobs outside their homes.
I wonder how the pope or Cardinal Pell would react if this happened to a niece of theirs or to someone very close to them. Would they sweep it under the carpet
or try & keep the victims quiet. I dont think so but Im pretty sure compensation
would be given without hesitating or a the victims having to put up a fight. The catholic church have alot to answer for & I can say for myself they are losing
alot of parishioners who no longer have faith in the church and how much they
hide from the public.I think it is double standards to preach to the public &
they do total opposite, very hypocritcal I think. My heart goes out to the victims
who are totally innocent & unfortunately trust these perperators. I knew Emma for a while & my heart goes out to her family .
Chris, the point I was trying to make was the incredible insensitivity of allowing Fr McKiernan to celebrate mass in a school chapel, and the Marist Brothers’ hamfisted defence of their actions. The parents themselves stated they had no objection to his saying mass, but wondered - rather reasonably - whether another church or chapel might not be more suitable. It’s very far from being vigilantism to have legitimate concerns about known offenders residing or working near a school. In this instance, he was in the school grounds at the instance of those who run the school. I think that’s a worry.
Which puts the church in the strange position of refusing the sacraments to openly gay people (Pell in Melbourne) whilst allowing gay priests (most of the molestation appears to be homosexual) to administer them.
As long as he’s accompanied by someone else (and none of his victims attend the school) then I don’t see the problem if he is of the type of abuser who befriends children before abusing them (rather than the much rarer kidnap stranger type). People (quite understandably) get much more concerned about the pedophile they know about when they really need to be more concerned about the ones living in the community they don’t know about and have yet to be caught.
George Pell should be in prison.
If the CEO of (say) BHP was given convincing evidence that their staff were molesting children, and proceeded to deny there was a problem, to keep it under wraps with internal enquiries, and to transfer the staff somewhere else in the company to get them away from attention, that would make them a clear-cut accessory to crime.
I know that “benefit of clergy” used to exempt priests from secular law, but this is the 21st century, not the 15th.
I thought the Fosters might read this, so I am leaving this message here.
I was abused, I carry that pain. I saw your interviews on the internet, and I wanted to express my deepest sadness for what happened to your family. And I would like to thank you, from the bottom of my heart, for doing what you do. Too many people are silent, and the burden on those like yourself is too great. But I think that is changing. Please believe that.
The pain is too heavy for you to carry. Please let us carry it with you. Please trust that we are there with you. I do what I can, in my own way, to try to make a positive change to the world. It’s not much, when you look at the big picture. But please remember that I and people like me are also here with you.
Hi My name is Michael Foss, My sister Lucrecia was Emma’s partner for the past 5 years during that time she was also her carer and they lived together and struggled with life together. My sister commited suicide on May 31st.. Just weeks ago. She could not cope with the loss of Emma and also had a similer past. What happened to Emma ruined many many lives including mine and my mothers!
Michael,
You and your mother and your sister are in our thoughts. Your sister’s struggle and pain must have been so hard.
take care.
What a sad, sad story Michael. Winifred your comments also brought me to tears.
I can only hope these last few weeks of publically exposed pain are a watershed and the catholic church has a change in heart.
I can only endorse Ambi’s thoughts and hope you both take care.