Church sex scandals' heavy legacy By Robert Pigott BBC religious affairs correspondent

The agreement of a Roman Catholic diocese to pay $100m (£53m) in compensation to victims of sex abuse takes the Church in America past another milestone in the settlement of its long drawn out scandal.

Several US archdioceses had to file for bankruptcy over the scandals The fact that the Diocese of Orange, in Los Angeles, is spending so much in meeting the claims of only 90 people, with another 544 cases outstanding there, gives an idea of the crippling financial burden on the Church.

Lawyers working on the litigation say abuse could eventually cost $1bn.

Other dioceses have found the price of abuse more than they can manage.

The Archdiocese of Portland in Oregon filed for bankruptcy last July. Tucson in Arizona and Spokane in Washington chose to follow suit.

The Archdiocese of Portland has begun an advertising campaign, calling on anyone abused by priests there to come forward, as part of the bankruptcy procedure.

The story is far from over. A report published last February by a committee of inquiry showed that more than 4,000 Roman Catholic priests had been credibly accused of abuse since 1950.

There were more than 10,000 victims, mostly boys.

Fewer donations

Groups representing those assaulted by priests and church workers insist there could be thousands more.

They say it can take decades for victims of abuse to come forward, and that the average age is 44.

It may be some time before the Church in America recovers the prestige and authority lost since the scandal unfolded

People often wait for their parents to die, thinking that to reveal the abuse would shame and disillusion them needlessly. For its part the Church in America says the abuse crisis broke out suddenly and then died rapidly away.

However, the scandal's legacy could be profound, because it comes at a time of upheaval for the Church. There is already restiveness among American Catholics over the Church's reluctance to give lay people - especially woman - a greater role, and rebellion over the Vatican's stern line on contraception.

The sex abuse scandal is likely to produce greater pressure for a review even of the compulsory celibacy of priests.

There could be physical changes too. Congregations are declining in many dioceses, and the supply of priests dwindling.

Falling collections

The large compensation payments - coupled with the move of Roman Catholics to the suburbs - have already forced the Archdiocese of Boston to close a sixth of its parishes.

Boston - one of the four largest archdioceses in the US with an estimated two million Catholics - has paid almost as much in compensation as Orange.

Since the scandal first broke in Boston, churches there have been getting significantly less in the collection plate.

As part of the settlement in Orange, Bishop Tod Brown is to make a personal apology to each person assaulted by a priest, nun or church worker.

Bishop Brown told a press conference he knew that the victims had already begun their healing process.

However it may be some time before the Church in America recovers the prestige and authority lost since the scandal unfolded.

-- - (David@excite.com), January 06, 2005

Answers

?

-- - (David@excite.com), January 06, 2005.

There were undoubtedly many boys. Many victims.

But There were more than 10,000 victims--? is hardly a proven fact. Settlements can be reached without anybody substantiating charges. Lawyers offer deals, knowing a diocese might want to quit before MORE damage is done to the parishes and the faithful. Or, bishops may attempt to salvage the reputations of innocent priests, by co-operating with prosecutors.

Priests are bound by their vow of silence. Under pain of mortal sin, they must conceal what is said in confession. That means they won''t have the opportunity to fight back fair and square, like you do, in court. All these factors come into play. No doubt many bad priests were fully guilty, even when the ''boys'' were equally to blame. There can be no excuse for them, nor the bishops who played ball and shipped them to another place. The whole Church has suffered for the sins of the few.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), January 06, 2005.

**The cost of having gay priest. Is it worth it?**

Only if your intent was or is to try and destroy the Church from the Inside out! Which is what they have tried.

The answer is NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!

-- Michael G. (NoEmail@Nowhere.no), January 06, 2005.

BBC has an anti-Catholic agenda. Note how they never talk about sexual abuse in the Anglican church, which promotes all of the same sins--contraception, homosexuality, destruction of authentic Catholic priestly identity--that they say the Catholic Church needs.

The Catholic Church will be poorer, smaller, and its bishops wiser; the sad result is that the path to Salvation will become narrower, as the secular world finds it easier and easier to wallow in its own orgasmic self-destruction.

But one thing that will not happen--apologies to the writer--is the capitulation of the Church to the demands of the secularists screaming outside the gate.

-- anon (ymous@god.bless), January 06, 2005.

Why overlook this figure of 4000 priests, ''credibly accused''--? Why even trace it back entirely to homosexuality?

This means 4000 accusations in 54 years. That goes back to the reign of Pius XII; and it takes into account accusations, not convictions. Out of that number we figure every accusation was true? Every priest was gay?

I recall once the question a friend of mine asked somebody who was threatening a lawsuit. (On another subject.) He asked, ''Do you like having everybody LAUGH at you?''

''Because they'll laugh you out of court, Jerk.'' --Here, the sad thing is, priests can't agree to a lawsuit. It's not in the cards. I believe some liars have collected big settlements. Just my opinion.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), January 06, 2005.

"Credibly accused"?? What in the world does that mean? Last I heard the credibility of an accusation had to be determined by a court! And then the person is called "guilty", not "credibly accused". In this country "credibly accused" means INNOCENT until PROVEN guilty. Not only have most of these "accused" priests not been proven guilty of anything, most of them have not even been formally charged with anything! Just accused! Who determined that these mere accusations were "credible", and how? Sounds like the kind of meaningless phrase generated a reporter, either trying to sensationalize his own story, or venting his personal hatred for the Church.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), January 07, 2005.