The victims of abuse call into question whether Pope Francis has done enough to stop predators

Since 133 cardinals meet in Rome to resolve the next pope, questions about the latter’s legacy will turn into great discussions.

For the Catholic Church, no aspect of Pope Francis’ record is more sensitive or controversial by the processing of sexual abuse of children by the clergy.

Although it is widely recognized that he has gone further than his predecessors in recognizing the victims and reforming his own internal procedures of the Church, many survivors do not think that he has gone far enough.

Alex McPherson’s abuse of Catholic priest begins around the age of three and lasts for six years.

“When I was nine and a half, my father caught him trying to get me on the living room sofa,” she told me when we met on the shore of Boston.

“For me, it was an almost daily event.”

After finding the abuse, her father called the police.

A hearing for a criminal appeal against the priest Peter Canchong, charged with attack and battery by a minor, was appointed on August 24, 1984.

But unknown to the family, something extraordinary was happening behind the scenes.

The church, an institution that had enormous power in a deep Catholic city – believed that the court was on its side.

“The court is trying to deal with the question in such a way that it helps Father Peter and avoid the scandal to the church,” writes the then Archbishop of Boston, Bernard Law, writes in a letter that will remain hidden for years.

Thinking about the events of more than four decades ago, Da MacPherson admits that her abuse took place long before Francis became a pope.

But during the same period, through a series of global scandals that are still unfolding, the question of the systemic sexual exploitation of children has become the most congenital challenge of the modern church.

This is a challenge that she believes that Pope Francis failed to rise as she clarified when I asked her how she reacted to the news of his death.

“I don’t really feel like I had a big reaction,” she replied.

“And I don’t want to take away the good he did, but there is just a lot more that the church and the Vatican and the people who respond.”

The letter of 1984 of the law of Archbishop Bernard was addressed to a bishop in Thailand.

Mentioning the charge of “violence against children” was written two months after the Boston court hearing, which really ended without a church scandal.

Peter Kanchong – who was originally from Thailand – was spared by official criminal charges and received probation for the year on condition that he was far from McPherson’s family and had a course of psychological therapy.

However, the archbishop’s letter notes that even the church’s own psychological assessment has determined that the accused priest is “motivated and not met with therapy” and therefore must be “forced to face the consequences of his actions” both in civil and church law.

But instead of acting on this advice, he asks the Bishop of Thai to immediately recall Peter Canchong in his diocese in Thailand, mentioning the second time the risk of a “serious scandal” if he remains in the United States.

Although the press reports suggest that the church authorities in Thailand have agreed to bring it back, Peter Canchong neglects the withdrawal by finding a job in the Boston area at an adult facility facility.

In 2002, more than 18 years after G -Ja McPherson’s father first called the police, the archbishop’s letter was publicly announced.

In a remarkable decision, it was one of the thousands of pages of documents that Boston Court ordered the Catholic Church to be released.

The local Boston Globe newspaper first began to seriously challenge the authority of the institution in the city, placing the stories of the victims on its front pages.

Soon hundreds came out and their lawyers fought in court to reward open decades of internal records related to sexual abuse of children.

The church has tried to claim that the protection of the first amendment to the freedom of religion, which was entitled to keep these files secret.

The order to roll them has led to a moment of catchment.

At that time, Peter Canchong denied the allegations.

“Do you have evidence? Do you have witnesses?” He told the Boston Globe, who still found him to live in the area.

However, Macpherson was one of more than 500 casualties who won a $ 85 million civil case for the abuse they had suffered in the hands of dozens of priests.

The internal files have shown that over and over again the Archbishop Act has dealt with his knowledge of abuse in the same way he tried to deal with Peter Canchong – by simply moving priests to new parish.

After the settlement and until then Cardinal, Bernard Law resigned from his position in Boston and moved to Rome.

For the surviving sense of church impunity, it was further complicated when he was given the honor of a seven -year post as Archdiocery from the Basilica Di Santa Maria Magire, the same building where Pope Francis is already buried.

Many ecclesiastical internal persons credit Francis that they go further than their predecessors to deal with the issue of abuse.

In 2019, he called more than a hundred bishops in Rome for a conference on the crisis.

In the abuse of children, he told them, “We see the hand of evil.”

The conference has led to a review of the church legislation of the Papal Secret, which allows cooperation with civil courts when required in cases of abuse.

However, the change does not force the disclosure of all information related to the abuse of children, only its disclosure in specific cases where it is officially required by a legitimate body.

In the same way, a new law requiring the accusations to be taken into account that the internal church hierarchy has stopped having to head to the police.

G -jj’s lawyer, McPherson, Mitchell Garabedian, a man depicted in the spotlights of the Hollywood blockbuster for the Boston abuse scandal, told me that there are many ways that the church continues to exercise a secret.

“We have to argue in court to get documents. In fact, nothing has changed,” he said.

His legal victory in 2002 may be a decisive moment, followed by an avalanche of such cases in dozens of countries, but he has no doubt that knowing the misconduct remains hidden in churches around the world.

“While he was doing some things, it’s not enough,” G -MacPherson told me when I asked her assessment of Pope Francis’ record on the subject.

She wants the church to reveal everything she knows.

“One of the largest things is the overturning of predatory priests and the people who covered it and keep them responsible in a regular court and do not protect them and hide them anymore.”

Watching the endless news about the Pope’s funeral and preparation for the appointment of his heir was painful for her.

“This is the abuse that is celebrated in some way,” she told me, “Since the concealment is still there, they are protected behind the Vatican walls and their canon laws.”

This is a reflection of news, which is difficult to escape because of her mother’s continued faith in the Catholic Church.

“That’s all I’ve heard about the news. She’s obsessed with watching this, so I’m just stuck and flooded with him.”

Now, at the age of 85, Peter Kanchong has never been convicted of a crime in the meantime.

He was neither deprived of his priesthood, although he was prevented from holding an official position in the Boston Diocese.

The church of the church of the accused clergymen notes his case as “not yet resolved”, without a definitive determination of guilt or innocence, noting that he is “awol” – he is absent without leave.

“I have been trying for years to defroke it, and this is because it can only be discouraged where it was ordained, who was in Thailand or by the Vatican,” said G -Macpherson.

She points out that the church has fallen into trouble to change the name of the parish where it was abused – to be considered, to try to start again after what happened there.

The BBC has asked the Boston Diocese about its views on Pope Francis’ heritage, as well as a response to the allegations that the Catholic Church maintains a culture of secrecy for its own internal records.

We did not receive an answer to these questions.

We also asked if the current archbishop could do anything to help the victims strive to remove a priest from the priesthood.

We were aimed at the Vatican.

As the Catholic Church now defines the business with the choice of a new pope, Da MacPherson has little hope for more reform.

“You say you want to move forward. You say you want to bring people back to the basket,” she said.

“But you can’t do any of this until you really admit these sins and keep these people responsible.”