Sex scandal rocks Church in Kerala - Priest screws & impregnates 'minor'
Ratan:
Time for the Pope to get these guys some women, what's up with celibacy anyway.
========================
D Jose in Thiruvananthapuram
The Church's decision to let off a priest, who impregnated a minor girl, with a simple punishment has given birth to a new controversy in Kerala. Protests are mounting against the Church authorities for trying to save the priest from the clutches of the civil law.
The Centre for Development Action, an organisation which trains social workers, has convened a conference at Kottayam tomorrow to discuss the legal and ethical issues concerning the incident. The vital question the organisers are likely to pose at the conference is whether the religious courts can bypass the judiciary as they have done in this case.
The incident took place in Changanacherry Arch diocese of the Syro-Malabar Church in 1995 when Fr Cyriac Karthikapally established sexual relationship with a girl studying in Class IX in his parish at Kurumbanadam.
The girl became pregnant and gave birth to a child in September 1998.
The ecclesiastical tribunal of the diocese, which found Fr. Cyriac Karthikapally guilty of having sex with the minor girl in violation of the vow of celibacy he took as a priest, settled the issue by removing the priest from the pastoral ministry and offering a "remuneration" to the girl.
While the tribunal sanctioned an allowance to the priest, it left the quantum of remuneration to be paid to the victim to the Archbishop.
The Church's decision to settle the matter within the framework of Canon laws has been questioned on several counts. While some felt that the Church authorities should have referred the case to the police after it found the priest guilty, others argued that the Canon law itself was not applied in a just manner.
Changanacherry Liturgical Action Committee leader and associate editor of its mouthpiece Liturgical Action, Prof. T J Mathai, said it was the duty of the ecclesiastical tribunal to relieve the priest to marry the victim.
Prof. Mathai took strong exception to the term "remuneration" used in the tribunal judgement. "It is too insulting for a minor girl who did not realise the consequences of the sexual act. "It is difficult to believe that the judges used the term without knowing its import,' he added.
Prof. Mathai told rediff.com that there was gross distortion of Canon laws in the case. 'The punishment the ecclesiastical court awarded to the priest is too simple considering the nature of offence,' he added.
The Liturgical Action Committee leaders feel that there is more to the case than meets the eye and have, therefore, demanded a high-level inquiry.
They said that both the girl and the priest had admitted that they had indulged in sexual activities in different churches. This, according to LAC leaders, would have been possible only with the knowledge of the priests of the concerned churches. "If it is so, the people have a right to know whether the other priests were also involved,' Prof. Mathai said.
The public opinion on referring the case to the judiciary is sharply divided. The Church has been maintaining that it was not the Church but the victim to approach the judicial authorities. Changanacherry Archbishop Joseph Powathil said that he had dealt with the case as per the Canon laws on the basis of the complaint he had received from the victim and her father.
However, many feel that it is not easy under the present set up of the Church for ordinary people to proceed against a priest in the judicial court.
216.32.165.70 |
