The reputation of the Christian Brothers was prioritized over child safety.
For decades, the Christian Brothers — a Catholic religious order operating across Australia — shielded men convicted of child sexual abuse within its institutions, moving offenders between schools while warnings went unheeded and reputations were guarded. Now, as survivors seek legal redress, the order claims near-insolvency, having transferred its most valuable properties to a separate entity for a single dollar each. What emerges is not merely a story of institutional failure, but of a moral architecture built to protect the congregation from consequence — long after the children it harmed had been left to carry the weight alone.
- Two convicted child sexual abusers continued to receive housing, vehicles, food, and a monthly allowance from the Christian Brothers even after their criminal convictions — a practice the order defends as a Gospel obligation.
- Brother Peter Toomey was warned of inappropriate conduct with boys as early as 1973, yet remained in teaching roles for nearly thirty more years, cycling through schools while senior officials looked away.
- Brother Rex Elmer's victims — orphans already stripped of protection — have spent decades medicating trauma with drugs and alcohol, their suffering now measured in court testimony spanning nearly half a century.
- The Christian Brothers has declared near-insolvency just as survivor compensation claims mount, while multimillion-dollar properties quietly transferred to a separate entity for one dollar each remain beyond survivors' legal reach.
- A NSW Supreme Court moratorium now freezes abuse cases as survivors weigh a settlement scheme, caught between an order pleading poverty and a property-holding entity refusing to accept responsibility.
Records obtained by the Guardian reveal that the Christian Brothers, a Catholic religious order in Australia, has been housing and financially supporting convicted child sexual abusers — covering their rent, utilities, food, vehicles, and a monthly allowance — even after criminal convictions.
Brother Peter Toomey's case stretches across three decades of institutional negligence. Senior officials were warned as early as 1973 that he had behaved inappropriately with boys. Rather than remove him, the order moved him between schools — Parkville, Forest Hill, Cathedral College — where he ran choirs, supervised altar boys, and taught sexuality classes. A further complaint arrived in 2000 before he was finally removed from teaching. He was convicted in 2005 and again in 2019. A royal commission found the order had knowingly placed more children at risk by prioritising its own reputation.
Brother Rex Elmer targeted orphans at St Vincent's Boys Home in the 1970s — children who were wards of the state and among the most vulnerable in society. Sentenced to jail three times, most recently in 2021, Elmer left survivors who have spent 46 years living with shame, fear, and psychological damage, many turning to drugs and alcohol to cope. A sentencing judge described the abuse as intrusive, obnoxious, and frightening — inflicted by a man the children believed held absolute authority over them.
When pressed on why it continues to support convicted abusers, the order's Oceania leader invoked a 'Gospel imperative' to care for all brothers, arguing that expulsion would burden taxpayers and reduce the order's ability to monitor offenders. The congregation's own constitution, he noted, requires it to provide for members' material needs in full.
This defence has arrived at a moment of acute financial pressure. The Christian Brothers recently declared near-insolvency and proposed selling its remaining 36 properties to settle survivor claims. But over the past decade, the order transferred multimillion-dollar homes, land, and school buildings to a separate entity — Edmund Rice Education Australia — for one dollar each. EREA has refused to sell those assets to compensate survivors and is actively resisting attempts to be named as a defendant. A NSW Supreme Court moratorium now pauses all claims while survivors consider a settlement scheme.
The result is a legal structure that appears designed to place the order's wealth beyond the reach of the people it harmed — leaving survivors to pursue an entity that holds the assets but denies the liability, while the Christian Brothers, still sheltering convicted abusers, pleads poverty.
The Christian Brothers, a Catholic religious order operating in Australia, has been housing convicted child sexual abusers on properties it owns, according to records obtained by the Guardian. At least two brothers with documented histories of severe child abuse have lived in accommodations paid for by the order—housing, utilities, food, vehicles, and a monthly living allowance of $1,200—even after their convictions.
Brother Peter Toomey is one of them. In 1973, senior officials within the Christian Brothers were warned that Toomey had engaged in an "indiscretion" with a boy. Within two years, they learned he was "too familiar in his touching of the boys." Despite this knowledge, Toomey remained in teaching positions at Christian Brothers schools for nearly three decades. He was moved between Parkville, Forest Hill, and Cathedral College, where he organized the choir, altar boys, and taught in the school's sexuality program. Senior officials knew all of this. In August 2000, another complaint emerged. Toomey was finally removed from teaching at the end of that year. He was convicted in 2005 of ten counts of indecent assault against Trinity College students in the 1970s, and again in 2019 for assaulting two boys aged 14 and 15 during that same period. A royal commission concluded that the Christian Brothers' decision to prioritize institutional reputation over child safety meant more children were placed at risk.
Brother Rex Elmer abused children at St Vincent's Boys Home, a Christian Brothers facility for wards of the state, in the 1970s. His victims were orphans—children already marked by trauma and vulnerability. Elmer has been sentenced to jail three times, most recently in 2021. One survivor, speaking in court, described living for 46 years with "constant feelings of shame, fear and psychological scarring," medicating the pain with illicit drugs and alcohol. A sentencing judge noted that Elmer's victims had believed themselves helpless: "Here was an adult, a man in authority, a man of God, doing what they no doubt believed to be their private acts that were intrusive, obnoxious, frightening and wrong."
When asked why it continues to house and support convicted abusers, the Christian Brothers offered a theological justification. Gerard Brady, the order's Oceania leader, testified in court that the organization has a "Gospel imperative" to "care for all Brothers" and "the needy." He argued that expelled offenders would become burdens on taxpayers and might not seek treatment. By keeping them within the congregation, he said, the order could monitor their behavior and support rehabilitation. "We believe that society is more likely to be protected by an offender remaining part of the Congregation and being monitored," Brady stated. The order's constitution, he noted, requires it to provide financial support to current brothers, covering housing, utilities, health insurance, medical and dental care, vehicles, spiritual retreats, and food.
This arrangement has emerged as the Christian Brothers faces a financial reckoning. Last month, the order declared itself nearly insolvent and said it could no longer afford to pay survivors' court claims. A NSW Supreme Court moratorium now pauses current and future abuse cases, giving survivors time to consider a settlement scheme. The Christian Brothers proposes selling its remaining 36 properties to pay creditors, including survivors. But there is a complication: over the past decade, the order has transferred multimillion-dollar homes, land, and school buildings to a separate entity called Edmund Rice Education Australia—for one dollar each. EREA says it will not sell those assets to help pay survivors, though the Christian Brothers claims it will not prevent survivors from suing EREA directly. EREA is currently resisting attempts by survivors to make it the defendant in their claims.
The effect is a legal architecture that may shield the order's wealth from the people it harmed. Survivors are left to pursue compensation from an entity that owns the assets but refuses to acknowledge responsibility, while the Christian Brothers—which continues to house and support men convicted of abusing children—claims poverty.
Citas Notables
The reputation of the Christian Brothers was prioritized over the welfare of children to whom Toomey had access, and this was inexcusably wrong.— Royal Commission finding on Peter Toomey case
We see this as a Gospel imperative... we believe that society is more likely to be protected by an offender remaining part of the Congregation and being monitored.— Gerard Brady, Christian Brothers Oceania leader, testifying in court
La Conversación del Hearth Otra perspectiva de la historia
Why would an organization continue to house and financially support people convicted of child sexual abuse?
According to the Christian Brothers, it's a matter of religious obligation. They argue they have a Gospel imperative to care for all members, including those who've offended. They also say that if they expelled these men, they'd have no means of support and would become burdens on the state.
But doesn't that put children at risk?
The order claims the opposite—that by keeping offenders within the congregation, they can monitor behavior and ensure treatment. But the historical record suggests otherwise. Peter Toomey was warned about in 1973, and officials knew about his inappropriate conduct within two years. He remained in schools for 27 more years, moving between institutions, organizing youth programs. More children were abused during that time.
What changed?
Nothing, really, until he was finally convicted in 2005. The order prioritized its own reputation over the safety of the children in its care. A royal commission said so explicitly.
And now the order says it's broke?
Yes. It declared insolvency last month and said it can't pay survivors' claims. But it's also spent the past decade transferring its most valuable assets—multimillion-dollar properties—to a separate organization for a dollar each. So the assets exist; they're just no longer technically the Christian Brothers' responsibility.
Can survivors sue that other organization?
They're trying. But the organization is resisting, arguing it shouldn't be held liable for the order's actions. Survivors are caught between two entities, neither of which seems willing to fully answer for what happened.