BishopAccountability.org
	Chapter 21 Fr Caden Cloyne Report July 16, 2011 http://www.justice.ie/en/JELR/Cloyne_Rpt.pdf/Files/Cloyne_Rpt.pdf [full text] [excerpt] Introduction 21.1 Fr Caden was born in the 1930s. He served in various parishes in the Diocese of Cloyne. He was its vocations director for a lengthy period. It was in this capacity, during a vocations workshop, that Fr Caden abused the complainant, Patrick,105 for the first time. Complaint, 2004 21.2 Patrick alleged that he was abused by Fr Caden in the early 1980s. The abuse started when Patrick was 16 or just below that age and was attending a vocations workshop. The alleged abuse initially involved fondling but moved on to penetration and oral sex. Patrick later became a priest of the Diocese of Cloyne. Fr Caden and Patrick remained in contact until around 1999, according to Patrick and until 2004 according to Fr Caden; Fr Caden’s view is supported by another priest who knew both men. 21.3 In December 2004, following encouragement from a priest in whom he had confided, Patrick told Bishop Magee that a priest of the diocese had abused him as a young man. Patrick declined to reveal Fr Caden’s identity on this occasion. Patrick told the Commission that, on first reporting, there was no discussion about the child protection procedures operated within the diocese. He himself was not aware of the detail of the guidelines which were in place. He told the Commission that there probably were training days for priests in the diocese but he did not want to go. The Commission recognises that the Framework Document was sent to all the priests of the diocese (see Chapter 4) and that training was in place (see Chapter 8). 21.4 Privately, in January 2005, Patrick revealed the name of his alleged abuser to a friend who was also a priest in the diocese (not the priest in whom he had first confided). Patrick expressly forbade his friend to tell the bishop the identity of his abuser. Notwithstanding this, his friend raised the matter with the bishop He was aware that Fr Caden was involved with vulnerable children in his ministry and that he was chairman of a board of management of a school. Furthermore, he considered that Fr Caden should not remain in ministry in the face of what he considered serious allegations. He told the bishop that he was aware of the identity of the priest accused of abusing Patrick. He told the bishop that, even though Patrick had forbidden him to reveal the information, he was concerned that he ought to, and may well be obliged to, reveal this information. He sought the direction of Bishop Magee. The bishop told him that he would revert to him. During a regular meeting in March, the bishop told him that Monsignor O’Callaghan had advised that he had no obligation to reveal the information. Unhappy with this approach, the priest friend tried to contact a child abuse expert. He then contacted the Catholic Church’s national child protection office in Maynooth in March 2005. There, he was advised that Monsignor O’Callaghan’s advice was incorrect and that he ought to reveal the name of the alleged abuser to the bishop. He went back to Patrick and urged him to reveal the name to the bishop. Patrick was not ready to do this and again forbade his friend to reveal it to the bishop. Patrick considered that it was a matter for him to reveal when he was able to do so. The priest friend told the Commission that he considered the approach taken by Bishop Magee and Monsignor O’Callaghan on this issue was not what he had expected and that the bishop had compromised his role and his authority. Bishop Magee told the Commission that he did not seek further detail from the friend due to his concern that forcing the situation might be prejudicial to Patrick’s wellbeing.
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.