The editorial indicts the Catholic Church for allowing “child molesters” to “silence” their victims, and then speaks glowingly of Jon David Couzens for making “the wrenching decision to speak out.” It also says that “a few of the church’s more radical defenders are trying to impeach Couzens’ character.”
The lies abound. To begin with, it is a lie to imply that the Catholic Church has a problem with clergy sexual abuse. Indeed, no institution, religious or secular, has a better record today than the Catholic Church. It is true that the Church had a problem, but that ended a quarter century ago: almost all the cases of priestly sexual abuse occurred between the mid-1960s and the mid-1980s. Furthermore, almost all the cases involved homosexual priests who hit on postpubescent boys, thus the charge of “child molesters” is a lie. The data are incontestable—none of this is a matter of opinion.
Jon David Couzens’ account is disputed by the only other person who can corroborate it. So why is Couzens’ story deemed believable, and the one who says it never happened is ignored? Also, why hasn’t the Star released the name of the person who says the whole story is bogus? More important, the Star needs to explain why it thinks that it is possible for a person who was allegedly abused several times to have no recollection of it.
Couzens may be a hero to the Star, but his character is indeed questionable: he was implicated in a murder. Why hasn’t the Star revealed this to its readers? Does it want to “silence” its critics? Why did Couzens wait 30 years before he told his “wrenching” tale? Because the time was ripe to cash in after Fr. Ratigan’s name hit the papers?
Contact Star publisher Mi-Ai Parrish: email@example.com