YOUR COMMENTS

Very moving, powerful statement, Ric.

Thank you, thank you for stressing it is not history, as the bishops try to salvage their reputations by shifting to another topic.

Progress, yes, but eternal vigilance is necessary. There are so many survivors who have not come forward, either because a parent is still alive, or the shame is too great. And no one ever asked a male victim, "What were you wearing?"

The letter writers who charge survivors with ugly motives for political gain are hurtful beyond measure. Truth is, some have settled for less because they could not admit they were raped.
- Carolyn Disco, Merrinmack

Having knowledge in these cases, I'm going to weigh in.

These kind of cases are not limited to priests in the Catholic Church. However, at this point, that institution and those who, knowingly and unknowingly, empowered the abuse and the circumstances that allowed this to go on as it did have been the subject of more inquiry and revelation than others. But don't stop looking there. Don't stop looking, period.

The victims were not only alter boys, parish kids or students of a parochial school. Many were girls - and for some reason girls have had a much harder time coming forward. I think the reason is most went on to become wives and mothers and the shame (they wrongly) feel is attached to their purity as a wife and mother.

Many priests had these vacation homes, or access to such, and used these to bring children from wherever they were assigned in ministry. How wonderful to spend some time in the hills of New Hampshire, sands of Cape Cod, or the rocky coast of Maine.

But local kids were also targets. The ones hired to rake leaves, or wash cars. It didn't just get limited to one flavor from one candy jar in one store.

It has never been as simple as where a predator was moved. It is about where they went and who they got their hands on. It is not about when they got caught; only when or if they stopped and many never did except by death.

The controversy with the Catholic Church is this was all known as a problem, although not every instance and every perp, and kept hidden in practice. These things happen wherever adults are placed with children and the proper lookout and the proper precautions and the proper transparency are not in place.

Don't be suspicious of delayed claims of being a victim. It is humiliating to come forward to admit you were such a victim. If you really take the time to think about it, and place yourself in their shoes, you can understand why. Like it or not, what happened was life-altering - one way or another. So is revealing it, one way or the other. It takes courage, sometimes years and decades of building up to it, not the greed that those who refuse to believe this happened, and happened to so many, want to shout in blind faith or simple blindness.

There are a few who have abused the process, no question. But they are a very small percentage - no question.

Other adult-with-children organizations have the same problem. Do I need to name some, or do you all know them?

The point being - this all should never be "behind us."

And those who believe it was all back when, all gone away, and doesn't happen anymore have a problem. In fact, that may be the bigger problem.
- Ric, New Boston

Shame us & David

Thank you for the replies without the verbal abuse. That's hard to come by on such boards when questions are asked. I understand what you both are saying and would never imply that nothing ever happened in any of the case. I guess I'm just as concerned about false claims like what I bet is going to happen to Tiger Woods now. Not every woman coming forward is going to be telling the truth, especially when media and half the population will be so eager for the latest scoop.

It just seems to me that these child predators never stop and I would feel better about ruining someone if more recent and verified accounts were found to have taken place. Twenty year old claims tend to make me wonder and I'm sure both of you would never want to put the wrong person away based on accusations that can not really be verified as being true.

I know any victim of such a thing might find my words painful, but that is why coming forward as fast as possible is important to make a strong case.
- Deb, Derry

no harm asking Qs, deb. the reason you don't hear more recent allegations is simple: it takes years, usually decades, before victims understand what they experienced was criminal, understand that the harm is on-going, understand that their perpetrator will likely hurt others, understand that they may have legal options, and find the strength and courage to explore those options. And during that process, often church officials either pay off or intimidate the victim, so he or she stays silent.

David Clohessy, SNAP, 314 566 9790
- david clohessy, st. loius mo

I thought by now the abuse issue was in the rear view mirror for the Catholic Church

Aside from the Priest in question, authorities should bring to justice his superiors for hiding the situation and moving him to another parish
- Harry, Atkinson

To answer Carolyn,
Preists do not take a vow of poverty, only nuns are required to do so. Sexist, yes I think so.
- C, Manchester

HOw does a priest, with a vow of poverty, own a vacation home in a secondary state?????
- Carolyn Hunt, Littleton, NH

In re: to Deb from Derry:

There is a huge amount of guilt and shame that goes hand in hand with being a victim of such abuses. A feeling of "what was my part if any". Add to that an authority figure such as Priest being the one committing the crime and it is little wonder why years or even decades pass before, if at all, a victim comes forward and speaks. Years ago you dared not speak out against such things as society was not as open about it. If you dared to bring to the attention of an adult that you got "diddled" by another adult, much less a priest it was a 50-50 proposition on the outcome of the person you told doing the right thing for all the same reasons that you as a victim may have kept quiet. I know first hand as it has taking me almost 40 years to come clean on an incident that was enacted upon me by an older neighborhood boy. You think that there was some guilt and shame involved in repressing it for all this time???
- Shame-us, Manch.

Another fine opportunity for the bishop to show his lackluster leadership skills and desire to protect sex offenders.
- B, Manchester

I'm always a bit suspicious of some of these cases. I'm not saying the accusations are false, I just find it odd how the claims of sexual abuse in many of the cases often go back a few decades and then suddenly stop, from what most of us read about those who sexual abuse children they don't stop until they are caught red handed and with physical evidence to prove it. In this case they prosecuted him for alleged abuses that go back twenty years before any claims were made and he was removed in 1993.

Add on the current push the last decade or so to have anything to do with religion, and almost exclusively the Christian faith, removed from society by some and I can't help but be suspicious. I also ask myself why the double standard for churches and our public schools. We never hear of lawsuits against the public school system when the same thing happens with a settlement that pushes the school system to the brink of bankruptcy.

Forgive me for asking questions.
- Deb, Derry

McCormack shouldn't "ask" parishes to alert their flocks about this predator priest. He should insist on it. And he should personally visit Catholic churches near Pcolka's home, where he likely went to or helped with masses and could have met, groomed and molested children.

David Clohessy, national director of SNAP, the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (314 566 9790), SNAPnetwork.org, SNAPclohessy@aol.com
- David Clohessy, St. Louis, MO

It is not clear at all from the above diocesan statement that notices in the next few weeks on the Diocese’s website and in parish bulletins will in any way include the name, record and photo of Fr. Raymond Pcolka, the subject of yesterday’s press conference.

Standard general notices about reporting requirements that appear at least quarterly in bulletins and are part of the child safety section of the website are not the issue at hand.

That would be somewhat analogous to post offices having notices asking people to report federal crimes, instead of displaying specific names, records and photos.

If substantive particulars about Pcolka --- his name, photo, record of rape involving 16 children, and abuse in his home in Washington, NH in the 1970’s --- are absent, the goals of locating his potential victims or gaining any information about him are effectively compromised.

It’s the “neglecting to mention” aspect of so many past diocesan statements, generic or otherwise, that is the concern here. The Diocese has the photo and information about Pcolka; let’s see how meaningful its inclusion is or is not.
- Carolyn Disco, Merrimack, NH

The Salem witch trials were a series of hearings before local magistrates followed by county court of trials to prosecute people accused of witchcraft in Essex, Suffolk, and Middlesex counties of colonial Massachusetts, between February 1692 and May 1693. The episode has been used in political rhetoric and popular literature as a vivid cautionary tale about the dangers of religious extremism, false accusations, lapses in due process, and governmental intrusion on individual liberties.[1]

Despite being generally known as the "Salem" witch trials, the preliminary hearings in 1692 were conducted in a variety of towns across the province: Salem Village, Ipswich, Andover and Salem Town. The best-known trials were conducted by the Court of Oyer and Terminer in 1692 in Salem Town. Over 150 people were arrested and imprisoned, with even more accused but not formally pursued by the authorities. At least five more of the accused died in prison. All twenty-six who went to trial before this court were convicted. The four sessions of the Superior Court of Judicature in 1693, held in Salem Village, but also in Ipswich, Boston and Charlestown, produced only three convictions in the thirty-one witchcraft trials it conducted. The two courts convicted twenty-nine people of the capital felony of witchcraft. Nineteen of the accused, fourteen women and five men, were hanged. One man (Giles Corey) who refused to enter a plea was crushed to death under heavy stones in an attempt to force him to do so.
- George O., Berlin