Joe,

This is what seems puzzling.

As you say, in some cases priests identified as child molesters were given extensive, state-of-the-art treatment. However, there seems ample evidance that in many other cases many others were merely transferred to another parish, with no warning to the parishners, or peromoted to other positions of authority within the church.

Does anyone really have an explanation why, if this knowledge was present? Surely this was neither caring, or responsible, or anything to be proud of, regardless of ones faith.

I suspect that, added to the severity of the offense, by those in authority, in the awards, judges took into account the failure of the church to heed early signs of molestation, to report it to the authorities, or to take reasonable measures to stem the harm to children from inside.

The opportunity to stem the damage was before legal actions, not after the huge settlements you mention (I suspect mainly for fear of future legal actions).

I note in some cases that the settlements were not voluntary made by the church until after a few rigorously contested cases failed (in some cases, parishes and Rome tried to lay total blame on the offending priests).


Maybe if the church and parishes reached out earlier and more compassionately to those molested by their priests, thay would now have more funds for other charities?

I approiciate that parishes must dig deep. Would it not be reasonable for Rome to financially assist, since they were not innocent bystanders of this mess through the many decades.

BYW, the parishes were always legally obliged to report sexual impropriety to authorities, not just recently. One would have done this in other aspect of ones lives, why not when priests were involved?