Criminal or careless? Bishop Gijsen accused in Iceland

It is a story that not so much indicts him as a criminal mastermind or even a bishop with ill will against his accusers, but depicts him much more as a bishop in a strange land who relied too much on his local clergy. The investigation into the abuse history in Iceland’s Diocese of Reykjavík mentions the name of emeritus Bishop Joannes Gijsen several times, most notably in the case of a man who accuses him of covering up a case of sexual abuse by a priest.

A bit of investigative journalism by Dutch blogger Remco van Mulligen reveals facts that the regular media avoids (in favour of partial and suggestive reporting). He outlines the case which is detailed in the report by Icelandic commission which looked into the matter, and we learn that it relates to abuse committed years ago by a now deceased priest of the Diocese of Reykjavík. Bishop Gijsen’s predecessor, Bishop Alfred Jolson met with the victim, who handed him a sealed letter outlining the case, and although the bishop assured the man that he would make sure nothing similar would happen in the future, the letter was left in the diocesan archives. When Bishop Gijsen arrived in 1996 he was urged to pick up the case again. He did so, met with the victim and both agreed that the letter should be destroyed, since there was no clear indication of sexual abuse. All this, according to Bishop Gijsen’s written statement to the commission. There is no letter and the victim is no longer alive.

The sad fact is that the priest in question, who was involved in other abuse cases as well, had an unrivaled position of power within the Icelandic church. Since all of Reykjavík’s bishops have come from abroad (the last four bishops were from the Netherlands, the United States and Switzerland), they relied heavily upon the local clergy, at least to get to know the local situation. No priest was more relied upon, at least by Bishop Gijsen, than one Fr. Ágúst George. And he is now revealed as the main perpetrator of more than one case of sexual abuse.

As Van Mulligen writes:

“The Commission creates a picture of the priest George as someone who saw bishops come and go, and wasn’t concerned by anyone or anything. Gijsen, for example, urged George several times to create an administration of what happened in his school [George served as headmaster of a Church-owned primary school]. The priest assured him he would, but did not keep his word. Gijsen allowed this to happen.”

Whatever the reasons that Bishop Gijsen had for not insisting on further investigation of the claims (for this case was not the only one that he, or Bishop Jolson, neglected), it is clear that more should have been done. Now, under current Bishop Pierre Bürcher, the sad extent of the sexual abuse by Fr. George and physical abuse by school teacher Margét Müller becomes clear only now.

Coupled with the fact that much of the diocesan archives from the period that Gijsen was bishop in Roermond are missing, we get the picture that Bishop Gijsen may have had the right intentions, he lacked the firm proactive hand that should have been employed when the first rumours became clear. It also shows that bishops have the duty to get to know their diocese and take an active role in the running of it, but administratively and pastorally.

Published by

incaelo

I'm a 37-year-old lay Catholic from the diocese of Groningen-Leeuwarden. I write about the Catholic Church in the Netherlands. I not only enjoy bringing selected developments to the attention of readers, but I also think that it is sometimes important to allow a wider audience to read about the state of the Church in the Netherlands. That's why a fair number of posts about that topic will be translations of Dutch articles, episcopal writings and whatever else.

5 thoughts on “Criminal or careless? Bishop Gijsen accused in Iceland”

  1. This is all very sad. I was fortunate to attend a midweek Mass at this cathedral last month and was impressed by how reverently it was elebrated. We even sang Salve Regina after Mass. Let us pray for the Church in Iceland.

  2. All the people mentioned as criminals in this article are foreigners. Margaret Muller was 100% German. Catholics are a minority in Iceland and Icelandic Catholics tend to to not be very serious about their faith, so hardly any Icelander ever became a monk, a nun, a priest or a bishop, since the change to Lutheranism. Before that, Icelanders had a Catholicism of their own and almost all the Icelandic priests and bishops were openly cohabiting with significant others and had sons and daughters, which was seen as perfectly fine and good in the eyes of the general population. Since the nation changed to Lutheranism, a more papal form of Catholicism has been practised here, and as a result we have had to import all priests, bishops, nuns, monks and so on from abroad. Catholicism is quite alien to the Icelandic mindset and almost the majority of Iceland’s Catholics are foreign immigrants, mainly from Poland and several Asian countries

  3. So, yes, like I said, all the criminals in these sex scandals here have been foreigners, because you can’t find a real Icelandic catholic, serious about their faith, so they don’t choose a life of celebacy, but import such people from abroad. Icelanders are fairly tolerant about religion and such, but very prejudiced against Catholicism, much more so than they are towards even Islam, and prejudice against most other religions hardly exist, although fundamentalist Christians get prejudice too.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s