Because the reporting on the Vangheluwe – Danneels case is in Dutch, much of the information is difficult to access.
One important piece of background has recently surfaced. Tom Heneghan of Reuters wrote to Austen Ivereigh at America:
What is not said in the transcripts but was reported in the other paper running the transcripts (Het Nieuwsblad) is that the victim was moved to speak out after learning that Vangheluwe had consecrated a deacon who was a child abuser. One of his victims later committed suicide. Vangheluwe’s victim felt this might have been avoided if he had spoken out about Vangheluwe years ago. The victim cannot just accept an apology from his uncle, he feels a duty to do more, but he does not come across as vengeful. At one point early on, he even says to Danneels that if he (D) suggests a coverup is the only way, he might have to learn to live with that. But then he pulls himself together again and says Vangheluwe simply cannot stay in office if the Church is to stand for anything at all.
Ivereigh is backing away from his attempt to soften Danneels action or rather refusal to act. Danneels was caught on tape acting like bishops usually act and will continue to act. And Danneels will suffer no consequences, nor will any future bishop who covers up sexual abuse suffer any consequences, and they know it. Until we get a true reforming pope like Pius V, the hierarchy will continue to tolerate abuse whenever they can get away with it – which is almost always.
What Vangheluwe did to his nephew could have gotten him executed in very painful fashion in the Middle Ages – but Danneels doesn’t even want Vangheluwe to suffer any embarrassment. Such are the tender hearts of our hierarchs – for each other, not for us.
PS It appears from this article that in 1995 Vangheluwe ordained a certain Marc V as a deacon, even though Vangheluwe knew that Marc V. was a convicted child abuser (suspended sentence) and that one of Marc V.’s victims had committed suicide in 1991. The victim’s mother pleaded in vain to Vangheluwe not to ordain the man who had driven her son to suicide. Vangheluwe insisted the victim’s family must forgive Marc V.The nephew felt that his silence enabled this situation: if he had spoken out, Vangheluwe would not be a bishop and therefore he would not have been able to ordain Marc V. as a deacon.
The attitude of the hierarchy toward child abuse can be seen in this ordination. They were willing to ordain a man who had driven his abuse victim to suicide. Perhaps, in fact, the fact that Marc V had abused children before his ordination was a plus: another abuser in the clergy who would “understand” and not “judgmental” toward what Vangheluwe had done to his nephew.
Marc V. remained a deacon and worked in a Catholic school until Vangheluwe’s downfall caused his background to become public. Then he was “temporarily” removed.
“Such are the tender hearts of our hierarchs – for each other, not for us.”
And for those who commit murder, not for their victims.
And for Muslims, not for oppressed Christians
What is it about the clerical culture of mandatory celibacy that attract idealists, homosexuals and those who sexually abuse children and vulnerable adults?
Among the biggest clericalists are large numbers of lay people who assiduously manipulate their clerics into acting like that.
What about all the formation staff where they train deacons, why did they recommend Marc V. for appointment?
As a would be faithful Catholic I am devastated at for instance the sheer lying spirit and cosmic scale self pity of Godfried. He was asking (before God) to be recorded.
(Can we have clarification in which country Marc V. was convicted?)
This puts Holland’s allowance of assisted suicide for minors in a whole new light.
Marc V. was convicted in Belgium – but he was Flemish, and I presume that the Flemish attitudes to sexual abuse are influnced by Dutch laxity in the matter.
I ask:
What other bishops from Belgium knew about it and kept quiet?
Why should anyone be surprised by this. Non-celebate priests, bishops, deacons and nuns have been covering each other’s backs for centuries. Pedophilia and ephebophilia have been recognized as a serious problem in the Church of Rome since at least the third century, but nothing has been done about it–for good reason. The hierarchy are more concerned about protecting “Mother Church” and perpetrators, than they are in protecting vulnerable children and young people, male and female.
It is obvious that the hierarchy will not,never, ever, no matter what, hold thenselves accountable for their criminal actions. Therefore, every opportunity I get to speakt out, I will reccommend the following. Find an organization that has indicated that they support church accountability and request them to have their membership get together and in a specific week, all should write letters to a law enforcement agency, requesting an investigation of the Catholic Church ( AKA, bishops) I have suggested this to SNAP and I’m waiting to hear from one of their executives. This method can and should be used in any country, not just the US. It does appear that government agencies get involved in Ireland, Holland , England, & Belgium . So far, the US Justice department in the United States have been sleeping at the switch. I pray that SNAP, VOTF and other organization will realize that thousands of letters may get results. (Tucson Arizona)
<>
Opportunity.
The freedom from being an exemplar of the values and rules they promulgate.
If you conclude that it is the celibate life that draws them, ( I don’t) it only follows that the celibate state is a freedom rather than a burden.
They are not expected to show by example what any healthy familial relationship looks like.
My sons don’t want to be priests. One of them is interested in being an altar server.
I asked if they had ever thought about it and the silence was palpable.
I asked because I wanted to make sure they felt encouraged to look into it and explore the idea.
They would sooner discuss sex ed with me, than talk about a vocation.
The oldest has no interest in a life that doesn’t even include the possibility of a wife someday.
They like the priests we’ve been lucky enough to have. None of the men seemed in anyway effeminate.
The boys speak of them fondly, but not as one speaks of a person the are interested in emulating.
This is what I have often found to be true in most of my assignments. The exception was my last parish where a number of young people (from my parish and many others in the same city) were involved in a Church approved movement out of Europe – Les Equipes de Notre Dame (Teams of Our Lady). Amazingly, eight young men ( three were from my parish) went to seminary within a four year period. Two are now deacons, one is returning to seminary after a two year absence and one is in formation in a religious community. The ones who have stayed are good candidates; well adjusted, masculine, and socially adept.
In the general area or region where I live the Neo Catechuminate has many seminarians. Maybe the movements hold promise for inspiring vocations to the priesthood and religious life. Though I have mixed feelings about some of the bigger movements. I like Les Equipes very much, but find the Neo-Catechuminate a bit creepy, and don’t like Regnum Christi (and not simply because of Macial). Who knows what’s on the horizon but God does seem to have a plan.
I was abused by my own dad who was married.
I was also abused by a catholic priest . It is not a issue of being married or not. Both need to be held accountable and punished!