By Victor Ochieng
A Syracuse Bishop, Robert Cunningham gave a testimony in a child abuse case in which he said children abused by priests bear some level of responsibility. According to the Bishop, the age of reason in the Catholic Church is seven years and so boys who are molested aged seven or higher should shoulder some blame.
Cunningham made his statement while under oath in a 2011 deposition in a case brought by Charles Bailey, a survivor of s*xual abuse by a priest in Cunningham’s diocese.
Bailey’s attorney asked Cunningham whether a child abused by a priest is considered to have committed a sin in the eyes of the Catholic Church and the bishop answered, saying, “The boy is culpable.”
With that comment, priest abuse survivors Bailey and Kevin Braney revealed their intention to petition the Pope to have Bishop Cunningham dismissed from his position. Bailey said Cunningham’s statement didn’t come to him as a surprise after all.
“(Bishop) Moynihan said that right to my face – ‘The age of reason is 7, so if you’re at least 7 you’re culpable for your actions.’ That kind of floored me.”
Since Cunningham’s statement became public, the bishop has been trying to explain himself. A spokesman of his diocese also recently came out to clear the air, noting that Bishop Cunningham strongly believes that child abuse victims are in no way responsible for their plight and people aren’t being fair using “the deposition to characterize his [Cunningham] position otherwise.”
That aside, other statements made by the bishop in the deposition don’t paint him as someone sympathetic of the victims of predatory priests. For example, Cunningham said it’s quite a challenge for him to establish just how much guilt the victim bore.
“Well, I mean, without knowing the circumstances completely, did the boy encourage, go along with (it) in any way?” Cunningham asked.
The lawyer then proceeded to ask him if, in the eyes of the Catholic Church, a boy aged between 14 and 15 could be taken to task in a case where a priest asks him to have s*x with him.
“Obviously, what the priest did was wrong,” Cunningham said. “You’re asking me if the young man had any culpability, and I can’t judge that.”
Some people from the Catholic Church have also rebuked Cunningham’s statement.
“That is so absurd,” said Catholic priest Richard Sipe, who’s written elaborately on the issue of “s*xuality” in the Catholic Church. “It’s like saying a child who’s beaten is responsible for the beating. It’s prehistoric.”
According to Sipe, although the Catholic Church holds the age of reason as seven years, it’s only when it comes to choosing between right from wrong based on what a child is taught. Therefore, “when a priest tells a child that having s*x with him is right, the child should not be held responsible.”
Feeling the heat, Cunningham released a Sunday statement in which he stated his position on the issue clearly.
“Allow me to be clear: I in no way believe a child is responsible for being abused by any person,” Cunningham stated. “I also believe and have clearly stated that a priest who abuses a child is wrong as is any adult who takes advantage and harms a child.”
Source
