Monsignor Ian Dempsey Accused of Raping TAC Primate Archbishop John Hepworth
September 13, 2011 16 Comments
- Monsignor Ian Dempsey
The Age calls it as it currently stands:
A former head Catholic chaplain of the navy, Ian Dempsey, was named in the Senate last night as having allegedly raped a fellow seminarian 50 years ago.
The naming by independent senator Nick Xenophon came after the Catholic Church yesterday rejected the senator’s ultimatum that he would name Monsignor Dempsey unless he was stood down from his current post as parish priest in Brighton, Adelaide.
Monsignor Dempsey, 68, was made an Officer of the Order of Australia in recognition of his services as director-general of the navy’s chaplaincy. He has also served as vicar-general to the Adelaide archdiocese.
Monsignor Ian Dempsey and the Parish he works in is here.
The Telegraph also covers the sordid news here.
You may also want to read: ‘Catholic Church covered up sexual abuse, says this Archbishop’ here.
An abysmal state of affairs I’m afraid.
UPDATE I: The Archbishop of Adelaide, Philip Wilson, has released a media statement regarding the above which can be read here.
UPDATE II: Monsignor Ian Dempsey denies the abuse allegations here.
About Fr Stephen Smuts
50 years is a bit late to my mind to be bringing all this out, even if it is true! For the sake of the Church, this should have been done behind the public eye. Sad, very sad state indeed!
Yes, it’s messy. And why now that the Primate, by all accounts, never got what he expected from the Roman Catholic Church (Ordinariate wise that is)?
Indeed, this does not seem kosher at all? The old man-up attitude seems to be so long gone now, in fact whatever happened to manhood?
It is called a cashflow problem Fr.!
So if your son or daughter had been raped 20 30 or 10 years ago it would make it alright – because it’s in the past
There is no statue of limitations on such henious offences. However it does become harder to prove over a period of time. Which goes back to the serious question “Why did it take so long for the investigation to be done?”
For the sake of the Church? I think you need to go back to the seminary and have a good think about what the Church should really be about. It should be about people, not a hierarchical bueracracy that protects potential criminals. A breach of faith of such magnitude should not go unaddressed.
The Visible Church Catholic is always very important! I am not suggesting protecting anyone, but 50 year old accusations, against the life of Christian service also count here!
Persons holding office in the Church should be above reproach.
I cite: 1 Tim 3:8. This refers to Deacons, how much more then that for an even more senior member of the Church?
No one should be above reproach. We are all answerable. If there is nothing to hide and no wrong done, then we should welcome such an investigation. If we have done wrong, then the need for a swift , proper and thorough investigation MUST be held.
Are you seriously suggesting that a victim of rape should “man up” ? That is disgusting and you should be ashamed of yourself. Blame the alleged perpetrators and the Church who did nothing, not the victim.
Hi Fr Stephen, as I am not privy to the case I will not comment on the facts of the case. The one thing , that I have been taught as a Catholic, in all my years, is we should never fear and have the courage to speak out against any wrongdoings. The point here is that rape or any form of sexual wrongdoings, MUST be punished and the church must stamp out these wrong doings. Why ? Because, this act is wrong. If highlighted, we must be swift and fair to act after due investigation. I think the point here is that we must act fast and not let this blow over. I hope this was not the case, if not, then we must look at ourselves first and act FAST
The whole thing seems a bit odd. Why now after 50 years?
An investigation should have been held first before he was named.
A 50 year old accusation that is denied by the accused, who has had a distinguished career since (we are told). Does seem a rather odd way of going about something.
If the Senator was so confident of his information why did he not go to the police with it? Chances are the police would have to admit that they could not prove a case without a direct admission. So why use the Parliament, to get around the burden of proof?
Who put him up to this in the first place? Why? Smacks of an abuse of Parliamentary privilege, ensures that public opinion is now tainted and possibly beyond redemption if the accused person is subsequently found to have no case to answer.
Why did the Archbishop come forward only after 50 years? What is he seeking? How can anyone get to the truth after so long? Very unfortunate chain of events, that seems to leave more questions out there that will never be answered, or can be.
What are the alleged facts? Unless the Archbishop tells it chapter and verse, will anyone else come forward to give a version of the story? It is not as if he is a poor unfortunate uneducated individual. His career has not been hurt by this (again, an assumption), so what is the point of such a denial of basic justice?
Nobody condones the type of behaviour, that has been alleged.
It is sickening to think that those in whom we place our trust from a very young age as Catholics, might let us down in such a way. No matter what might be condoned behind closed doors, rape of any sort never can be. If proved, the law must take its course, but it must be said that the behaviour of those who have instigated this is just as reprehensible, in its own way.
How can the Monsignor defend himself now? If he is innocent, how can he prove it?
We have laws in this country to protect everyone, even those properly accused within the proper legal framework of our society. Everyone is entitled to a fair and unbiased hearing and must have the right to defend himself. Every man is also entitled to remain silent and say nothing, and that right should also be beyond criticism.
I would caution everyone to be careful before venturing an opinion on this.
This whole story further tears away at the Church’s integrity and credibility. What I see at play is power and how it is abused by men of the Church.
After reading Archbishop Hepworth’s story in The Australian, I don’t know how Monsignor Dempsey can maintain his position as a parish priest.
Reminder