Fugitive Priests Blamed on Law Enforcement

DALLAS - Police, prosecutors and judges in several countries have done nothing to stop Roman Catholic priests from going abroad to escape allegations that they sexually abused young people, and in some cases have allowed them to leave, according to The Dallas Morning News.

The newspaper, as part of a yearlong investigation into the international shuffling of accused clergy, found police and prosecutors who had failed to take the most basic steps to catch fugitive clerics. Some law enforcement officials said they did not have the resources to hunt down errant priests.
...
One case under U.S. scrutiny is that of Paul Baynham, who became a citizen of the United States while he was a fugitive from Canadian charges that he abused two adolescent boys more than a decade ago. Baynham, of Washington, D.C., denied the allegations. Immigrations officials said they were not sure how he was able to gain citizenship.

In North Dakota, authorities have not tried to extradite a fugitive priest, the Rev. Fernando Sayasaya, even though they located him two years ago and he admitted to police that he molested boys in the Diocese of Fargo. The News found the priest tutoring young people at a Catholic university in the Philippines. He told the newspaper he would not fight extradition.

"I'm trying to restrain myself," he said.

The priest said that his bishop had warned him through an intermediary to stay out of the United States to avoid arrest, but authorities have not investigated his claim...
More: http://www.fortwayne.com/mld/newssentinel/10379205.htm

I have always been a Catholic. When they first started their anti-Kerry crap, I called St. James in Seattle and asked them what was going on, why they weren't denying communion to Jeb Bush, etc., for being pro-death penalty and pro-war. She listened to me, sounded a little nervous when I asked about Jeb Bush, and said she would call me back. She never did.

In all the years I have been Catholic (and those may be coming to an end if I can't find a support group) I have NEVER seen the church not only actively support one candidate (however indirectly) but also go after a practicing Catholic running for office against a Protestant. I have always lived in liberal communities, so this isn't as strange as it sounds.

There are a lot of weird things with the sex abuse scandals. First, I think that most people are more angered by the collusion of top church authorities at covering it up and moving the subject priests around, hiding their actions, than they are by the sickness which caused it (I think treatment and honesty would have been a better course though of course it makes me angry, also.) I don't think this problem, though, is limited to Catholic clergy and I have to believe that there has been pressure on the Catholic church to suddenly bring the abortion issue to the forefront, make public statements distancing themselves from John Kerry, and to support Bush. In exchange, the guilty priests are allowed to disappear and punishment is minimal.

I think that the Republicans were scared to death that a devout Catholic like Kerry would easily walk away with the Catholic vote unless they did something.

I can't tell you how maddening this is. And it points out how the Church should have dealt honestly and openly with the pedophile issue a long time ago.

publicity, there was talk on DU about why so much media attention????

the spritual dogma is for the pathetic little guy beliveing he will have a life after death if only he succumbs to the mandates of the political hierophants.

Is Kerry really a "devout" Catholic?

I know he is divorced and remarried, although we have not heard much about that first marriage at all, and we have not heard how he became divorced and yet was able to maintain a position/membership in the church, or acceptance in the church after being remarried to Teresa. I know also that those in the higher income brackets and those in places of high political positions, are able to be "divorced" with the blessings of the church, using the ridiculous assumption that their marriage was not sexually compatable or some other ridiculous assumption, in order to have their "divorce" accepted/sanctioned by the church, yet the little guy, the little guy throwing an envelope with 10% of his hard earned money, every Sunday into the collection basket, is a sinner if divorced and if so, cannot re marry without being called an adulterer.

You see, religion is political, and moreso in these times, although maybe not, as I am not that privvy to the entire history of the church, the selling of indulgences and all.

There is no doubt about it. It is NOT all spiritual and holy. It may NOT be all primarily spiritual at all, but primarily political and the spiritual part is reserved for the little guy who is trained not to be a free thinker, under the penalty of hell or some other punishment.

It is for certain it is not a democratic institution. Few churches are. That is the reality.

Not just the Catholic church. And there are things about the Catholic church I really enjoy.

almost all churches are political, and almost none are democratic in nature. However, the fallacy of ad populum, ie because almost all are political, does not make it the right course for the Catholic church or any of them. It has led and will lead, inevitably, to a loose canon, especially when a man like "Bush is in control of the entire government and is offering ad hoc tax payer money to any one who would join arms with him in his fascism. Not to mention churches wanting to take over the country with their brand of religious beliefs, such as "pro-life" advocates that seek to diminish women and keep them subservient to the male patriarchy. This especially in the Catholic church, where women are definately assigned a lesser role-ie, none can become a "priest"

but there are other churches that are patriarchal and in worse ways - there are racist churches, many (most) churches discriminate against homosexuals, many are manipulative, etc. There are churches that beat children publicly. But I think that most members, including most of the clergy, are seeking spirituality somehow. In a perfect world, I would like to seek mine in a way that involves a traditional Catholic service. I would prefer to see married and women priests, and I still think that day will come. I think churches should pay taxes, too, BTW.

was supposedly sought by his first wife, after suffering a lot of psychological problems that caused him to do much of the child care because she was unable to. She has remarried and they are supposedly on good terms.

After he married Teresa, he sought and obtained an annulment from the Church, so that they could again receive Communion. Anyone can seek an annulment. It does cost money because canon lawyers charge fees. You cannot get an annulment for "not being sexually compatible" and I can't imagine where you got such an idea. You have to prove that your marriage was somehow invalid, because your spouse lied, was insane, had no intention of being truly married, etc. You have to prove there was no valid Church marriage, the civil dimension of the marriage being taken of in a divorce court, where you also have to pay lawyers. Money makes everything in life easier, unfortunately. But it's much harder to get an annulment than a divorce.

Personally, I think there are too many annulments in this country; American Catholics get most of the world's annulments. Annulments should be given only in extreme circumstances. But I won't judge whether John Kerry's first marriage was an extreme circumstance. I think he's wimped out on his supporters and I won't support him in 2008, but the annulment is between him and God.

When pro-choice politicians in the dioceses like Denver are denied the Eucharist?

This is what makes me so upset. They really have no explanation for the whole Kerry thing.

but I know. My comment was meant to be sarcastic. I became furious over the abortion--Eucharist issue, because they have their own moral issues to content with before denying communion to others.