A VETERAN campaigner for abuse victims has questioned the contrast between the swift action taken by the Catholic Church over Cardinal O'Brien's resignation and the length of time taken to deal with allegations of sexual and physical abuse made by members of the public against priests.
Frank Docherty, a founder member of In Care Abuse Survivors (INCAS), said the church had been forced to get rid of O'Brien swiftly because he had created an "embarrassment" that the hierarchy couldn't cover up.
Docherty, who suffered physical abuse as a child in an orphanage run by nuns, said the contrast between how allegations of O'Brien behaving inappropriately with adult men were dealt with in comparison to allegations of criminal abuse against minors showed the church wanted to both "minimise" the issue of offences against children, and sweep clerical scandals such as O'Brien's under the carpet as quickly as possible.
His comments come after another alleged abuse victim, known only as Chris, told how his life was "ruined" after being abused by a priest in the 1990s from the age of around nine or 10.
The Catholic Church in Scotland said it removed the priest involved from his parish when the allegations were made last year and a file on the allegations had been sent to the Vatican. It is still waiting for a decision.
In contrast, O'Brien was forced to resign early by Pope Benedict XVI, just over a day after it emerged three serving priests and a former priest had accused him of "inappropriate acts" against them nearly 30 years ago.
He has admitted sexual misconduct but does not face any criminal allegations, or any claims of child abuse.
Docherty said: "The reason Cardinal O'Brien's case came and went so quickly was that they were trying to cover it up, but they couldn't cover it up because he admitted it. They were making sure it wasn't prolonged because it was an embarrassment. The Catholic Church are great at minimising everything."
Docherty, 69, suffered beatings at the hands of nuns in the 1950s after he was sent to Smyllum Park Orphanage in Lanark at the age of nine.
He has previously tried to sue the Catholic Church over the physical abuse he suffered – but the case was one of many actions effectively blocked by time bar. He has also pressed for a full public inquiry into allegations of abuse in Catholic-run homes without success.
He added: "It is so unfair. Every time we seem to come up against a brick wall. I suffered from daily beatings and it has ruined my life.
"We were always brought up to respect nuns and priests and when this person was doing what she was doing and looking with hate on her face, that is when the trauma set in.
"We witnessed the dark side of these people and what they were capable of."
There have been longrunning concerns over the cover-up of cases of abuse in the Catholic Church. Back in 2000, the Sunday Herald ran an investigation revealing that a priest who carried out a series of sexual assaults and rapes on an eight-year-old boy in Lanarkshire was being allowed to continue working unsupervised with children.
Last week fresh concerns were raised after an academic who compiled a report for the church on how to deal with abuse in the mid-1990s said not enough was done.
Alan Draper asked Scotland's eight bishops how much they knew and received letters which referred to 20 allegations of child abuse by priests.
But the bishops disagreed when he said independent experts should investigate further.
When asked for comment on the contrast between the amount of time taken to deal with abuse allegations from the public and swift action taken over O'Brien, a spokesman for the Catholic Church in Scotland said decisions in both cases were taken by the Vatican.
Last night the Vatican could not be contacted for comment.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article