WHERE DOES THE BUCK STOP?

In a press release from the Holy See on March 9, 2010, “concerning cases of the sexual abuse of minors in ecclesiastical institutions,” Director Fr. Federico Lombardi parrots out the church’s predictable responses to the widening problems of sexual abuse, particularly that of minor children.

http://212.77.1.245/news_services/press/vis/dinamiche/a0_en.htm

The institutional Roman Catholic church has reacted to the continuing sexual abuse debacle neither rapidly nor decisively, contrary to what Lombardi states.  The Vatican has attempted to distance itself from what has happened in country after country, first categorizing it as an “American problem,” then as a “homosexual problem.” 

What was done by church leadership in the United States, for example, it was forced to do by the pressure of public opinion after records, files and correspondence were forced into the public venue in 2002 by Judge Constance M. Sweeney, a very brave, grounded and principled Catholic woman in Boston, Massachusetts.

The church’s response continues to be re-active rather than pro-active while minimizing the systemic and endemic abuse of power and authority which has enabled and exacerbated it on the one hand while covering it up whenever and wherever possible on the other.

The “wide-ranging context” is that in countries from the United States, Canada, Australia and Ireland to Austria, the Netherlands and Germany church authorities have repeatedly and consistently disregarded their own moral and Canon laws as well as the existing laws of the countries in which these horrific crimes against humanity occurred. 

Lombardi does not mention nor does he admit to the well documented widespread cover-up of the sexual abuse of children by bishops and other church officials in many countries like the United States, which makes the church’s sexual abuse problems particularly egregious.  If church authorities had done the morally right thing initially how many children would have escaped being sexually abused by a particular priest?

When are people of good will going to say, enough! 

When are state legislators going to change the laws so that justice can be pursued for the thousands upon thousands of victims of childhood sexual abuse who have been unable to access let alone obtain justice?

In most states and probably in most countries existing criminal as well as civil laws give more protection to sexual predators and their enablers then they do to victims of childhood sexual abuse -  by anyone.  This is deplorable and should not be. 

The removal of all statutes of limitation in regard to the sexual abuse of children is the single, most effective way to hold predators and enabling institutions accountable before the law.

The state of Delaware in the United States is one of a very few states in the U.S. which have removed all criminal and civil statutes of limitation in regard to the sexual abuse of children -  by anyone.  It also legislated a two year civil window for previously time barred cases, again, by anyone.  That window closed in July of 2009. 

In a civil suit, unlike a criminal suit, the burden of proof that any sexual abuse took place is on the plaintiff.  The burden is not on the accused individual or institution to prove innocence, at least not in the United States.

Every victim of childhood sexual abuse should have a right to the pursuit of justice at the very least!

If Delaware can do it other states and other countries should be able to do it and hold sexual predators and any enabling institutions responsible, especially those institutions which chose to ignore their own internal laws.

I was privileged to testify before the Senate and House Judiciary Committees in support of the 2007 Child Victims Law in Delaware.

No rules and no laws of any religious organization or denomination should be allowed to trump the laws of a civilized society where the protection of children is concerned.

The Roman Catholic Church should be held to the highest standard as a signatory to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, a Convention that by any objective standard it has grossly violated for decades. 

Isn’t it time to formalize those violations as the crimes against humanity they truly are?

Sister Maureen Paul Turlish
Victims’ Advocate
New Castle, Delaware, USA
maureenpaulturlish@yahoo.com

The Pope is not as innocent as your article suggests. I don’t think he can be trusted.

The Pope should be thoroughly investigated on this issue.  What did he know and what did he do regarding this priest.  And also he should be investigated with regard to the way other cases were handled, including that of Marciel Maciel, founder of the Legionaries of Christ.  As a Catholic lay woman, I feel helpless.  I think the church owes us a real investigation of sexual abuse, and a firm commitment to see that it never happens again.  We need reform, and we need answers.

Thanks, Jimmy for the pertinent information.

Sister Turlish, have you attacked the public school system as you have members of the Catholic Church?  If you’re really interested in victims’ rights, then the public school system needs your help too.

According to s 2008 Associated Press report and this report, the public schools are FAR worse off than anything the Church deals with:

“Now, on the heels of the Catholic abuse scandal comes another of historic proportions—one that has the potential to be much greater and far-reaching. According to a draft report commissioned by the U.S. Department of Education, in compliance with the 2002 “No Child Left Behind” act signed into law by President Bush, between 6 percent and 10 percent of public school children across the country have been sexually abused or harassed by school employees and teachers.

cont.

“Charol Shakeshaft, the Hofstra University scholar who prepared the report, said the number of abuse cases—which range from unwanted sexual comments to rape—could be much higher.

“So we think the Catholic Church has a problem?” she told industry newspaper Education Week in a March 10 interview.

To support her contention, Shakeshaft compared the priest abuse data with data collected in a national survey for the American Association of University Women Educational Foundation in 2000. Extrapolating data from the latter, she estimated roughly 290,000 students experienced some sort of physical sexual abuse by a school employee from a single decade—1991-2000. That compares with about five decades of cases of abusive priests.”

http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/4/5/01552.shtml

If you are not going after the abusers in the public school system with 10 times the force you do the Catholic Church (as this report says the abuse is 10x worse in public schools) than I do believe you have some troubling motives.

Is it money?

Is it an old axe to grind with the Church?

I am interested if you attack the public system as you do the Catholic Church. Please respond.

To Liseux,
Why is it “different” for the Catholic Church’s priests to be sexually abusing children and others ? Because they are suppose to be representing the teachings of Jesus. To love and protect the innocent—not to harm them to a life of misery.
You, Liseux, are obviously a person that none of your loved ones have been sexually abused by a Catholic priest. Wonder what your comments would be if they had been abused ?
By the way—have you ever spoken to a victim/ survivor of sexual abuse by a Catholic priest ?

Sister Maureen et al,
Let us consider that sexual abuse has and always will occur.  As a practicing social worker I can tell you that nuns abuse as well as priests.  Sister, what would you have done in 1980 if the head of the order or the order’s council have sheltered a known molester undergoing psychological treatment? 

The kicker in this story is that the priest went on to offend again and was prosecuted for it.  This should catch our attention but it doesn’t does it.  This is hardly a secret case anymore.  As an advocate for the victims Sister you should speak up for them but there is an injustice here as well.  Or is your hate beyond recognizing that the one person in power who has done anything is now the person you attack.  What would happen if instead of attacking, you helped him?  But that would mean leaving aside a paradigm that you and all who hate think works - the destruction of the Church.  I don’t think Ratzinger is Christ but he is Christlike for all who really don’t have a prejudice.  He has taken up this cross and is bearing the guilt of the sin on his shoulders - he has done something and he has to bear all the stone tossing for it.

“At that time (1980) it was commonly thought that paedophiles could be cured through psychological counselling.”

Commonly thought by whom other than self-serving Bishops????  This statement is false.  If pseudo-journalists like Ruth Gledhill and Jimmy Akin were to ever actually DO their homework, they would know it was false.

WHOLE CHURCH URGENTLY NEEDS RADICAL REFORM

By Daniel O’Leary, parish priest in Kinsley, England. With permission of The Tablet l6 Jan 2010. http://www.thetablet.co.uk

Something awful is happening within our Catholic Church. The recent abuse reports in Ireland offers a stark warning to the wider Church. Bishops are denounced and forced to resign, archbishops stand accused, dioceses across the world file for bankruptcy, the Vatican itself is held to account. Calls for wide-ranging diocesan investigations in many countries grow stronger daily.

And yet, apart from those directly involved, there is a strange silence throughout the Church, there is a strange kind of detached numbness. Why is this? In an ecclesiastical system where radical critique is not welcome, it is often easier to say nothing, or to tell a few white lies, or not to bother at all. Whether lay people, priests or bishops, we do not want to b e victims of official displeasure, to break ranks, to be labeled disloyal, awkward or alarmist.

A widespread and silent “tipping point” in people’s faith and loyalty has been growing for a long time in numerous western dioceses. The causes of the current malaise are more complicated than we may wish to explore.

As we are seeing in Ireland, the surface can collapse with a sudden and shocking intensity and finality. Ireland’s disgraceful story today may be told in other places tomorrow. Many church leaders in European countries have said as much. Meanwhile, the relentless revelations continue to erode the moral authority of the Church across the world.

But where and when, confused people are asking, will there be radical and humble self-examination of the organization, of its leadership and of its self-awareness as the sacrament of divine love? The fundamental issue is the structure, culture and flawed theology that leads up to it.

Parishioners ask how a bland “churchianity"has come to replace a once-vibrant Christianity. There are centuries of reasons. Many writers, particularly in countries hard hit by various scandals, take certain members of the hierarchy to task. They trace the desperate efforts of well-intentioned, paternalistic bishops to ensure damage control by imposed silence lest the “the sins of the sons” be revealed, and Rome be upset.

They wonder, too, about the reasons for the continuing silence of the priest and the silence of the laity, given their long-standing difficulties with many of the Vatican’s directives and directions.

A transformation within the Church will not be facilitated by blame and bitterness, but by a realistic acceptance of the role we all play in its dying and its rising. The clerical model of church authority has drifted too far from the vision of the carpenter’s son.  Commentators refer to the idolatrous pull of power, privilege and possessions that subtly infect even the most religious organization when an isolating clericalism replaces a loving servanthood.

Strangely, maybe it is in Ireland, in the midst of its painful and devastating meltdown, and maybe indeed because of it, that elements of the truth may be emerging at last. Lay folk and clergy are beginning to speak out their truth in the public forum even if it brings conflict, shock and anguish within their own ranks and across the country.

Taboos are being broken in the heat of anger. A defensive scapegoating is being revealed. It is painful and hurtful on all sides, but also cleansing. It is socking and confusing, but healing too. But at least it is authentic and real, and reaching for transparency.

Thoughtful lay people are beginning to recognize the subtle sin of mistaking the symbols of religion for the substance of love, the rubric of true worship, external conformity for inner conversion.
Many leaders may be astonished at the clear majority-conviction of the faithful about issues such as the need to de-Romanize leadership, the need to relativise false absolutes, the need to recover the radical exclusivity of the Gospel.

John Paul II prayed for another “springtime” for the Church. So, too, do anxious people who quietly long for a leadership that will finally say sorry, and then start to learn again from the tender humanity of Jesus.  The recovery will be a long season of further conflicts and embarrassing climb-downs.

Beyond the scandals, a radical reform of the whole Church—its essential purpose and vision—is urgently needed. And this reformed Church will have so much to say to the world. But first it must befriend it. The “secular” postmodern world is God’s body too.

It will all be a vulnerable waiting, a hard lesson of soul-searching throughout 2010 and way beyond. Richard Rohr OFM and others are exploring the spreading phenomenon, of “the emerging Church”. This is not a new organization for disaffected believers but an ecumenical consensus of those who have rediscovered the charisma of contemplation, who, in the spirit of Vatican II, try to distinguish the essentials from the incidentals in church practice and teaching (see www.cacradicalgrace.org).

An emerging Church will refuse to build barriers of fearful silence around itself, will distinguish between faith and certainty, and will believe in charisma, imagination and joy.  People want to be nourished in their precious humanity. They want to be held and supported in the messiness and failures of their precarious lives.

They want to be reminded of their beauty, to tell their story, to prophesy with confidence, to have a vision of those bright horizons already traced on their hearts by God. Those who still believe are at the edge of the nest waiting to fly.

This green growing will happen only through long, open, difficult and courageous conversations.  Maybe a Third Vatican Council is what the Holy Spirit is prompting us to consider. Agenda for it already abound.

But first the Church must listen so as to be evangelized herself. The voice of the faithful—the sensus fidelium—needs to find a forum for a structured response, to find negotiation strategies so as to “quarrel peacefully”, as Cardinal Martini put it.

Like Jesus did, we must hold the tensions and doubts of the church community in our own wounded souls. But there will be no instant reconciliation, nor perfect closure. In “Healing”, D.H. Lawrence wrote:

    …The wounds to the soul take a long, long time,
      only time can help
      and patience,
      and a certain difficult repentance
      long, difficult repentance,
      realization of life’s mistake,
      and the freeing oneself
      from the endless repetition
      of the mistake
      which mankind at large
      has chosen to sanctify.

I agree with Anne Rice’s comment that the Pope should be thoroughly investigated. If he knew that Catholic priests were abusing children and then transferred them to other parishes, then of course he should resign. The world has a right to know what really happened. In the words of Oedipus, “Let all come out, However vile!”

However, I also think that the liberal press is guilty of sugar-coating the truth in its reporting of clerical sexual abuse. For the undeniable truth is that most of the cases of abuse that took place were homosexual acts. See http://www.staycatholic.com/articles.htm (scroll down to Clergy Abuse Scandal). Common sense would dictate that if you want to reduce the risk of children being sexually abused by clergy, you shouldn’t let candidates for the priesthood be ordained if they are known to have a homosexual orientation. Homosexuals are children of God, and should be treated with kindness and compassion, but they don’t belong in the priesthood. Pope Benedict deserves credit for recognizing that.

About the Oedipus quote, I think it is wise to qualify.  The virtue of discretion is a virtue for a reason; we don’t have to know every detail of every crime—in fact, it is unncessary excess that often makes things much worse.  For example, do you want to know every detail of Mr. Daughmer’s cannibalistic murders?
Now, with regard to these matters above (the article), knowing at least the basics isn’t a crime, but no one has discussed the fact that the then-Archbishop Ratzinger gave permission of residence for a priest of another diocese, who later returned to his unfortunate behavior?  Did Ratzinger send him to therapy?  Did he return him to pastoral work? Was it a priest of his diocese or no?
Let us consider those questions.  Getting in a huffy about everything without those key things is a little unfair.

Getting in “super investigation-I don’t think we can trust anyone, etc.” mode is probably part of what this article was intended to do.  As Jimmy noted, the priest was being treated in Munich, but effectively not a priest of the diocese.  In other words, the jurisdiction was still effectvely the priest’s own bishop.  Also, the fact that he was returned to “active duty” was likewise a decision of his own bishop of Essen,  not the Archbishop of Munich (i.e., Cardinal Ratzinger).
We shouldn’t forget the Dan Rather story about President Bush a few years back accusing him (falsely) of insubordiation or something of the sort while a pilot int he Texas Air NG—later shown to be a terrible lead.  Also, consider the Spanish-American War, instigated by the media of the day (the ship blew up not becuase of the Spanish, who had no interest in a new war at the time—this little piece of news was left to report after the war). Think about it.

I pray that the Vatican would call a new (pastoral) council.  There’s no more time for speculation and only precious time to prevent further abuse and episcopal malfeasance. It would be better to assemble all of the bishops together and let them hammer out real and lasting changes to canon law and the discipline of the clergy.  The time is now for the bishops to present real solutions and not evasive soundbites.

If defense of Jimmy’s defense of the Pope, I would like to recommend a couple links that cancel this hey-dey implication of the Pope:
1. Pontiff Cleared of Reassigning Pedophile Priest
Former Vicar General of Munich Archdiocese Takes Responsibility
http://www.zenit.org/article-28635?l=english
2. Media Failed to Blame Pope in Sexual Abuse Cases
Vatican Aide Stresses Pontiff’s Work Against Crime
http://www.zenit.org/article-28639?l=english
Enjoy!

re:Douglas Sirman comment

I remembeer the 1980’s and am college educated.  At that time the term Paediphile was rarely used if ever that I recall.  Any one who had “sexual” problems were considered that they needed help and if they worked at it and repented they could rededicated themselves to God and His Church. If some of our church leaders were misguided by not doing enough to help the victim, the child, that still needs to be addressed in all of society.  How does anyone compensate? 

Please consider that the Pope has called for a full investigation in to the Germany case. 

I will pray for all victims, and their abusers for their salvation.  The victims need to know that Christ is with them and there for them.  Please pray for them and for the Church, The Pope.

When you hear about a case like this, the first thing that should come to our mind is the need to pray so that God work his healing in the lives of all those harmed by this especially tragic sin. Regarding whose to blaim, etc. - I think that Jimmy is in the right. Cases like this come up thick and fast when the Holy Father is even remotely in question. It will blow over just as fast.

My prayers go out to everyone hurt from these terrible abuses.  It also goes out to the abusers, our Church and those like Sister Maureen Paul Turlish that seem to have a personal agenda against the Church. 

Let us all remember that 99 percent or more of our priests are good, faithful men and that hey suffer much from what has happened, because they, too, are looked at throught tainted glasses.  I have heard this from many priests.  Let us remember, too, that this abuse is not just in the Church, it is widespread throught many groups, including ministers, the public school system, doctors, in homes, family members and the list goes on.  The Church is “juicy” news to journalists and a fertile money field for lawyers, where as many of these other orginasations have things in place that do not allow for law suits. This is not an excuse for what happened, only something to keep in mind.

In other words, the abuse must be stopped in our society, getting back to more pure life all around.  The media would be a great place to start, the public schools with their rampant desire to teach sex education to the smallest of the little ones, movies, commercials, everything centered around sex and always attacking the purity of womanhood in one way or another.

Let us pray for our Church, families, children, our leaders, in the Church and the government….pray, pray, pray for forgiveness and peace in all of our hearts that Christ is with his Church and will get us through this very hard time.  We will all be stronger for it.

Christ’s peace

From a friend of mine, Fr. Tom Doyle, OP, who worked at the Apostolic Delegate’s office in Washington, D.C. in the 1980s:

MORE REFLECTIONS FROM 25 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE

Thomas Doyle
March 10, 2010

Not long after my New Years Day Reflections were published I received a message from a friend who passed on to me some reactions to my short essay.  I had planned on a response shortly after but time moved faster than I.  Although nearly three months have passed the issue burns now more intensely than ever!

First, one reader said he was disturbed that I had accused every bishop of neglect.  Actually I did not accuse any bishop of anything.

I related my personal experience and in that experience I found no instance the list of bishops who have proven themselves by placing victims above image is short…very short.  As of this date I can count only three: Bishop Tom Gumbleton of Detroit, Bishop Geoff Robinson of Melbourne, Australia and Archbishop Diarmiud Martin of Dublin.  For their efforts both Tom Gumbleton and Geoff Robinson were disciplined by the Vatican.  Archbishop Martin is still going, no doubt protected from the Vatican vindictiveness by the world-wide revelations of clergy sexual abuse that have recently sprung up.  There may be other bishops elsewhere who have responded to victims with care and compassion and made them the first priority.  I simply have not had any firsthand experience of it nor have I heard of any such response from survivors in the U.S., England, Ireland, Canada, New Zealand or Australia with the exception of the three mentioned above.

A lot of Catholics find this hard to believe and the prospect that it may be even slightly true, very disturbing.  They seem more upset at the disappointing news that most bishops don’t care than they are over the wholesale spiritual slaughter of the innocent victims.

Why?  That is the question that keeps burning.  Many have voiced the opinion that a secret directive from the Vatican is behind what certainly appears to be a uniform pattern of behavior.  Personally I doubt it.  I have never seen any evidence that would lead me to suspect that any secret orders had gone out either recently or in the past.

The much commented on Vatican document Crimen sollicitationis isn’t evidence of secret orders or a conspiracy.It’s proof of something far worse….a deeply entrenched policy.

A number of very reputable scholars have studied the entire Catholic clergy abuse phenomenon in search of believable answers to why the hierarchy has acted as they have.  I have read most if not all of the studies, articles, books and other results of the research.  The theory that seems to be the most credible and realistic is that the reason lies in the clerical culture which forms priests and bishops.

This culture is real and not an exaggeration or a myth.  I was part of it for almost forty years.  The institutional Catholic Church is essentially a monarchy.  The pope has absolute power.  All real leadership roles in the Church are held by celibate, male clerics.

There may be a smattering of lay people, men and women, here and there but they have no power and the way things are going these days with the frenzied rush backwards into the 1950’s, those few lay people who have jobs may well find themselves on the outside looking in.

There are numerous reasons, actually excuses, for restricting all power to priests and bishops but the fundamental one is the official belief that a priest is a cut above lay people because he is, in the words of John Paul II, configured to Christ….whatever that means.  Clerics base their power on this special union with Christ and the clerical culture bases its power on the belief that the institutional Church is the Church and was created with a hierarchical structure by God Himself.  The fact that there is no solid scriptural or historic evidence for this has never had a bearing on the fact that the hierarchy insists that every Catholic must believe it and act accordingly.  The Vatican council reintroduced the ancient teaching of the Church as The People of God.  Yet even before the council ended the Vatican curia and not a small number of bishops began the process of dismantling this teaching because it seriously threatened the immense power base of the curia and the bishops.  A number of reputable theologians and historians and not a few ordinary Catholics are convinced that John Paul II led the process of restoration….that is, a retreat from the Conciliar spirit back to the good old days when the Church was a kingdom and the laity did what they were told, kept their mouths shut and their checkbooks open.

Going a step further, the bishops believe they are absolutely essential to the existence of the Church, i.e., the institution.  They believe that the Higher Power does not want democracy, even though that appears to have been a concept that motivated Jesus Christ.  The bishops are taught that they are chosen by the Holy Spirit and once consecrated; they are the official teachers of the Church.

This of course can easily lead to what some psychologists refer to as acquired situational narcissism which inturn breeds the magical thinking that “I am omniscient, unaccountable, ten feet tall and bullet proof.” All of this explains the initial reaction to reports of clergy sex abuse which is to defend the institution and the bishops at all cost.  The bishops are the institution which is the church.  Protecting and shielding the bishops is tantamount toprotecting the Church.

One reader said something insightful and probably true: “Are the bishops just normal people who are drawn intoa culture of tyranny, which at the same time elevates and enslaves them?” He also said that “bishops are chosen from among priests who completely lack any sense of individuality and personal responsibility.  And so they blindly protect the institution and its assets.” I surely don’t have all the answers and probably don’t have many but I think this man’s ideas are worth adding to the list of plausible reasons.

Take a look at how the Church operates.  Historically in the seminary those aspirants to the priesthood who were docile, obedient, asexual and pious were deemed the right kind of future priest.  Those who had some spirit of individuality, asked questions, didn’t fit the stereotypical model of piety and didn’t believe that celibacy was necessarily a higher calling often ended up as former seminarians.  Don’t get me wrong.  I am not saying that every priest matched the description of the clerical drone in the seminary and carried it through to the priesthood.  In my life the priests who lived their priesthood not as robots for the monarchy but as vibrant ministers of Christ have been the majority and have also been the ones who have been instrumental in salvaging any semblance of the Church as the People of God.

Before I leave this topic I’d like to offer a quote from A Pilgrim in a Pilgrim Church, the very interesting autobiography of Archbishop Rembert Weakland.

Midway through the book he recounts a conversation he had with Msgr.

Justin Rigali (now a Cardinal….good behavior!!) who at that time (1978) worked in the Vatican and was the pope’s chief interpreter of the American Church.  Basically, Rigali was telling the newly appointed Archbishop Weakland how to be a good bishop: “His advice to me was unequivocal and could be summed up as follows: I should seek to follow clearly in all matters the Holy Father’s mind as seen through the documents of the curia and conform myself to them for the sake of unity in the Church’s teaching body or magisterium; I should demonstrate absolute loyalty to the Holy See and inculcate such loyalty in my people; I should become a paragon of doctrinal orthodoxy in my teaching and writings, relying principally on the teachings of the pope and the curia.  In this way my diocese and the Church in the United States would be unified and strong.” (p.  240).  It doesn’t take much imagination to draw parallels between this astounding definition of how to be a good Catholic, with similar mindsets in several less than honorable governments from recent history.  Suffice it to say that this attitude is deeply engrained in bishops and priests everywhere.  It aptly sums up the criteria used to evaluate candidates for the office of bishop.  The pathetic collection of mitered wonders in the U.S.  is clear evidence that the monarchy must be shored up at all cost….and the Body of Christ deflated and abandoned.

The most common response to revelations of sex abuse of the vulnerable by priests has been denial and blame-shifting soaked in narcissistic arrogance.  The Vatican and the bishops simply don’t get it!  In the early nineties the Pope and his talking heads all distanced themselves by proclaiming that this was an American problem and a salient cause was materialism, secularism and hedonism.  Some of the more psychotic rantings blamed it on the wholesale refusal to obey the 1968 birth control encyclical Humanae Vitae.  That was circa 1993.  Then Ireland exploded with the Brendan Smyth affair in 1994.  In 1995 one of John Paul II’s favorite cardinals, Hans Hermann Groer of Vienna was exposed and had to resign.  The revelations continued over the years.  The U.S.  bishops organized their defense against the victims, treating them to deceitful pronouncements about how caring they are while at the same time doing everything in their power to avoid any accountability.  Their true colors are obvious…they are afraid to reach out to victims, incapable to comprehending the horror of it all and equally incapable of any form of spiritual healing.

The bishops in the U.S.  and elsewhere regularly pontificate that they have made the world safer for children andthey have handled the sex abuse crisis in such a superlative way that it’s now over.  The power of the papacy and the episcopacy to change reality and re-write history appears to be waning!  Over the past few months what some predicted was inevitable has happened.  May, 2009 — The Ryan Report reveals systemic torture and sexual abuse in Ireland’s Church-run orphanages and child-care institutions.  November 2009 – The Murphy Report exposes the culture of abuse, denial and dishonesty in Dublin; February-March, 2010 – revelations of clergy sexabuse in Austria, the Netherlands, Germany and…..The Vatican!

All the pope has to offer is talk…more words, more meetings, more silly press releases and the promise of a special pastoral letter.  The “problem” is not going to be fixed by the pope, the bishops or anyone who works for the institutional Church.  Why?  Because they are the problem.  The light at the end of the long tunnel will remain way out of reach until the very system that produced the dysfunctional clerics and their equally dysfunctional bishops is ended and somehow replaced with not another monarchy but something that one can readily identify with the Body of Christ.

Does Jimmy Akin still have a data dump rule?

As Philip Jenkins (an Episcopalian Penn State professor whose book, “Pedophiles and Priests,” was published by Oxford University Press) and Hofstra University’s Charol Shakeshaft (in a study conducted by the US Department of Education in compliance with the “No Child Left Behind” Act in 2004) have pointed out, the problem is at least as bad with other clergy and a lot worse in the US public Schools—but the media has an agenda to promote.  (For instance, have you heard that Obama’s “Safe Schools Csar” is a homosexual activist who wrote the forward for the book “Queering Elementary Education,” endorsing the idea?  Probably not.)

Is that a reason or just an excuse aimed at mitigating this particular religious denominations’s culpability?  Has any other church have the documented cover-up that the RCC has had?  There have been cases but not on the same scale.

I will wait to see how the story plays out. It’s too early to believe the accusations or the defences, because people on each side have a strong incentive to tell only as much of the story as they want.

What I continue to find amazing about this story is the recourse to “what psychologists said” in the 80s.

The church claims to be a doctor of souls. It claims to have a special insight into sin and repentance.

That claim is now shown to be nonsense. The church knows no better than secular psychologists.

Absolutely!  The RCC has lost its way.

There certainly doesn’t seem to be any evidence as of yet that Cardinal Ratzinger did anything wrong.  Further investigation is certainly warranted in this, and every alleged case, but I worry that this is starting to look a lot like a witch hunt.  Certainly, the media seem a lot more interested in the story of abuse within the Church than they do with all of the other organizations it has occurred in, and now that it is getting into the general vicinity of Pope Benedict, the media sharks have gone into a feeding frenzy.

As far as a “coverup”, there certainly was one, though not in an organized manner.  Pretty much every family and organization has tended to cover these things up.

It also concerns me that concern for the victims seems to be measured by how much money they are willing to dole out.  I don’t blame dioceses for not wanting to pay out gigantic sums of money to the victims.  For each person that gets millions of dollars because of abuse, that equals thousands of needy people that the Church is unable to help.  Sometimes I wonder how concerned the victims are about all of THOSE people.  The lawyers certainly don’t give a rip, except about their own cut.  The victims need love, and they need therapy.  I’m not exactly sure why they need millions upon millions of dollars.

I do agree with others that have little time for the claim that we just didn’t know better.  The fact is that the Church, and Christians in general, should have known better, if they were following their faith, common sense, and the teaching of the Church, rather than secular “insights.”

Sadly, the personal and individual tragedies of victims of abuse are again being used as pawns in the crass power plays of the usual suspects… liberals, radical feminists, Communists, and other anti-Catholics (including traitors within the Church itself).

It is digusting that such liberals are willing to re-abuse the victims in order to strike out at the Pope and God’s Church.

“Is that a reason or just an excuse aimed at mitigating this particular religious denominations’s culpability?  Has any other church have the documented cover-up that the RCC has had?  There have been cases but not on the same scale.”

Uh…considering that all of the other Christian denominations added together have barely as many members as the Catholic Church has, it would be difficult for any other church to do ANYTHING on the same scale.  Also, other denominations tend to be more loosely organized than the Catholic Church.

Dave, Charol Shakeshaft,in a study conducted by the US Department of Education in compliance with the “No Child Left Behind” Act in 2004, has stated that the case against our public schools i 10x worse than in the Catholic institutions.

http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/4/5/01552.shtml

That in no way excuses what has occurred with priests BUT it does shine light on the media frenzy, and apparently the actions of some withing the Church who do not go after the pedophiles in the public school system like they have the Church.

New York tried to push back the statute of limitations last year to go after pedophile priests (some who were dead). Courageous lawmakers and individuals said go ahead, but open up the limitations on public schools to.

They said don’t just target the private schools.

Predictably, the attack ceased, because those bringing the lawsuit saw that it would bankrupt the state of New York to drop the statute of limitations on New York schools like on the Catholic Church.

It’s okay to go after the Catholic Church, but not the public system!

What hypocrisy!

We need to accept responsibility for ALL abuse and cover-ups, not just in the Catholic Church.

So I ask some of you who blast the Church if you are out there asking why 10x more public school students are molested.

If you’re not, yes, I question your motives.

Sister, your last paragraph says much about your stance: “All the pope has to offer is talk…more words, more meetings, more silly press releases and the promise of a special pastoral letter.  The “problem” is not going to be fixed by the pope, the bishops or anyone who works for the institutional Church.  Why?  Because they are the problem.  The light at the end of the long tunnel will remain way out of reach until the very system that produced the dysfunctional clerics and their equally dysfunctional bishops is ended and somehow replaced with not another monarchy but something that one can readily identify with the Body of Christ.”

As a faithful Catholic, I believe that the Pope, the bishops, and anyone who works for the institution Church (including you) will be part of the solution. In the end, the Pope is guided by the Holy Spirit, since Jesus’ promise in Matthew 16:18. I do know the pope is not impeccable, but he is infallible when teaching about faith and morals.

Are you advocating overthrowing the “monarchy” of the pope with a Protestantized version of Christianity where truth is voted on?

Sounds like it to me.

Please, just resond in kind. It is difficult to read your entire press release-type statement.

P.S. I understand you were not the author of this last paragraph I quoted, but you are promoting it. So, it appears you are of like mind.

liseux, I understood that what was posted was an article by one Tom Doyle, O.P. so why don’t you comment on it as the article it is by the person who wrote it rather than the person who posted it?

Do you think Sister would post it if she didn’t endorse it?

A brutal rhetorical question:  What would we be reading about man on boy sexual abuses had the RCC not admitted men whose preference for homosexuality was apparent and they were not accepted into the Priesthood?
A drunken priest in a downtown bar found later in bed with a prostitute would not have made it past the junk news folks.  He’d only be “hauling his oats” and they should allow priests to marry arguments. The press continues to ignore the fact more than 90% of these cases are homosexual pedophiles.  “Child abuse” allows the Gay leadership to take a breath since most people think of “child abuser” as a dirty old red nosed priest molesting a cute little girl on his lap. Doesn’t happen enough to make a headline.  This is the cover up we should be addressing. The Gay Priest (homosexual)whose identify is being hidden from the public.
Bob
Bob F
Bob

You’re on to something, Bob.  God will bring good out of this evil, and he already has been here in the U.S. The young priests we have are solid, MEN, who are more orthodox than their predecessors, according to Fr. Corapi, who has visited seminaries across the country.

“All the pope has to offer is talk…more words, more meetings, more silly press releases and the promise of a special pastoral letter.  The “problem” is not going to be fixed by the pope, the bishops or anyone who works for the institutional Church.  Why?  Because they are the problem.  The light at the end of the long tunnel will remain way out of reach until the very system that produced the dysfunctional clerics and their equally dysfunctional bishops is ended and somehow replaced with not another monarchy but something that one can readily identify with the Body of Christ.”

What a bunch of horse hockey.  Why don’t you just say the problem is Jesus Christ since he founded the Church.  Sounds like Fr. Doyle drank the “Spirit of Vatican II” kool-aid.  The blame needs to be squarely based on those who committed the criminal acts and truly created the problem, the pedophiles themselves.  No one talks about them, rather the vast majority of the talk is about how to deal with the bishops and the Pope.

I’m glad the church is taking the steps it is taking to protect children. It IS long over due, however, I think society and the media is completely two faced and grossly unfair to the church in general when it comes to the sex abuse scandal. They often forget conveniently that Paul Shanley was their darling for many many years.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101020422-230384,00.html

Pedophiles are monstrously opportunistic predators who are exceptionally subtle and devious. And if they happen to be very smart as well, they are even more dangerously insidious. They make it a science to blend in, and hide particularly well behind a friendly helpful smile. The expression ‘wolf in sheep’s clothing is especially appropriate for them.

In the past, when they *were* found out, efforts would be made to rehabilitate them. The fact that they have a 99% recidivism rate was unknown. They simply can NOT be rehabilitated. I hope society at large will someday accept that fact and put pedophiles, in GENERAL, in prison for life even after the *first* proven offense. If we regarded child molestation as serious to society as armed robbery we *WOULD*!! Why don’t we should be the question??

Remember little Jessica Lundsford. IF we had stricter policies then Jessica Lunsford would be alive. John Couey (who was NOT a priest) was paroled and released for child molestation several times because sentences were too lenient and still are in spite of Florida’s Jessica Lundsford act.

The pope is right when he says the sex abuse situation is a societal (world wide) cancer. Many of the guilty priests are dead, those who were caught and who might be still alive were defrocked, but civil law only gave them light jail sentances. What then?? Even Paul Shanley, proven pedophile, monster by any standard, received ONLY 12 years for destroying a child’s life!!!!! From what I rad of people who were molested as children, they never really recover. They carry the scars all their life, many even commit suicide. Yet Paul Shanely, when the same society that condemned the church for allowing him to be a priest got a chance to try him only gave him 12 years in prison for a crime (and a further chance to appeal) that should be a life sentence, and would be had he robbed a bank with a gun and injured someone. Why wasn’t he given a life sentence?

Explain that!!!!

All this pointing at the church while all over the world pedophiles from every walk of life go FREE with little or NO jail time (after they destroy a child’s world)in most cases is ludicrously foolish and shows what hypocrites we, as a society, truly are.

They shouldn’t be going free.

ps: Good job Jimmy! Keep up the good work. I hope the message sinks in.

A few previous commenters cite some studies and claim that “the problem is at least as bad with other clergy and a lot worse in the US public Schools.”

This depends on how you define the “problem.” While there may be other abuse happening in other religions and in public schools the data is unclear. The study cited combines “harassment” in the same category as “molestation” in comparing the Catholic Church to public chools. Schools appear to report drastically higher rates of REPORTED harassment, so it appears that if “the problem” was separated, the Catholic Church would have a much higher rate of “molestation” and schools would have a much higher rate of “harassment.” While both are deplorable, I’m pretty sure it’s clear which one is more damaging to children.

Furthermore, our public schools have made it a point to have an open atmosphere that contributes to much more reporting of “the problem”, while the Catholic Church hid these abuses and shuffled priests from town to town as they continued to molest children. To compare those situations as equal ignores a serious flaw. The Catholic Church Hierarchy KNEW this was going on, and chose to hide it from their congregations.

It’s unconscionable that the article and the commenters would seek to misrepresent the facts in this manner.

Wow, how silly of me.  I thought this article dealt with the accusations - proven false - that Pope Benedict XVI knowingly allowed a pedophile priest to continue in his ministry while cardinal.

Now, from the comments, I have learned that the above article was just code for “Please, post your screeds about the Church sex scandals, no matter how tangentially (if at all) they are related to the actual content of the article.”

I wonder what Sister Maureen used as an excuse to call for a complete restructuring of the Church prior to the sex scandals….

Congratulations, Jimmy Aikin.

You somehow managed to make the church and the Pope look worse on this front than they already did. You should be rewarded with an excommunication.

the bishop of Essen (or someone) came to Cardinal Ratzinger and said, “There’s a priest from the diocese of Essen who has committed sexual improprieties and needs to receive counselling. Can you put him up in a rectory while he is given psychological therapy in Munich…And what if it turns out he did know that the sexual improprieties involved children??

I don’t know much about this particular case, but you are saying Ratzinger KNEW the nature of what was going on and maybe even the priest’s exact crime, and he just let him move in without informing the police. Who cares if it was one of his priests, some other Cardinal’s priest or the janitor from a Boston cathedral? If I were harbouring an active paedophile, even for the purposes of curing him with my therapy sessions, I’m pretty sure that excuse wouldn’t wash with the cops, even if I cured him. I would have wound up in jail also. 

<i> At that time (1980) it was commonly thought that paedophiles could be cured through psychological counselling.”

Were you even alive in 1980? I was. I don’t recall anybody claiming that active paedophiles should be allowed to run free because all they needed was some therapy. However, I do recall paedophile-rapists being arrested and sent to prison.

In 1980, most people felt that they should be sexually mutilated and/or put to death. While it was changing, few at the time distinguished homosexuality from paedophilia. It’s amusing how the Catholic church now conveniently uses this modern separation to excuse its past crimes from the sin of consensual adult homosexuality, which is to be treated more harshly than they treated child rapists BEFORE this separation was made.

What some folks were actually suggesting was that mutilation or death was not the punishment of choice and that, with extensive therapy, many of these paedophiles could be RELEASED FROM PRISON AT THE END OF THEIR SENTENCES with a vastly reduced risk of re-offending. That was the argument. 

It seems the Catholic church thought they could just hold hands with the guy and cut out the whole embarrassing “prison” part.

what were the ages of the children? Pre- or Post-Pubescent?

Hello Jamie,

I am one of the posters that brought up the plague of sex abuse in the public schools, (10X worse) and yes, I do wonder why some don’t do 10x (I’d settle for 3x) as much bashing away at the public institutions than the Catholic.

As for covering things up, that’s inexcusable. But are you outraged that it’s going on NOW in the public school system?

“US School Districts Cover Up Teacher Sex Abuse with Confidential Agreements and Payouts”

“An exposé by the Oregonian daily newspaper shows that US teachers who sexually abuse their students are often given a pass into other teaching jobs as a cost-saving measure.. .....

The Oregonian reported yesterday that in some US school districts teachers found to be abusing students are being paid off with letters of recommendation, cash settlements and health insurance in confidential agreements, in return for a quiet immediate resignation. In the agreements, district officials promise not to tell potential employers of the teacher’s past misconduct.

Kenneth John Cushing was a recipient of one of these pacts, and left Claggett Creek Middle School in 2004 after allegedly molesting some of his female students. The Oregonian obtained a copy of the deal in which school officials promised not to reveal Cushing’s behaviour to prospective future employers.”

http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/feb/08021907.html

No one is misrepresenting facts about this issue.

Sr. Maureen,
I am stunned and disappointed that you would respectfully reference Archbishop Rembert Weakland (disgraced by a financial and sexual scandal) in your lengthy critique of church teaching and culture. This reveals in you an attitude that is apparently more driven by a political agenda than by a true desire to reform the church and protect children.

HOW are we going to save this church ?

IF every pedophile and gay in the Roman church would be arrested/kicked out, this church would collapse ...

Is this the END of the Roman church ???!!

Also in response to Sister’s quote of Fr Tom, it is exactly the same as the “Voice of the Faithful” people in the US, who want to demoratize the Church.  If my memory serves me well, Jesus said to Peter, “I will give you the keys of the Kingdom.”  If anyone wants to change the hierarchy, it is Christ the King himself they don’t seem to understand.  Also, he said to the Apostles, “I will be with you always.”  If Jesus is with them, where will we be if we abandon the successors of the Apostles and the Vicar of Christ?  Think about it.

Demoratize should be Democratize.  Sorry about that!

To add a little to Michael’s comment, I think it is also wise to recall that this isn’t a hierarchy of a worldly kind of rule.  Would a huge number of Anglicans be coming home if this were merely a work of man?
Moreover, those who think the Church isn’t doing anything about the crisis, despite mistakes of a limited number of priests in the past, aren’t in the know that the CDF and the Pope are working hard, very hard on this, and have been working to correct errors in some seminaries’ formation/acceptance systems.

Thank God the Church isn’t reactionary.  In this day and age people want a response right this instant.  But it doesn’t work that way.  As a matter of prudence all the facts need to be gathered and then evaluated.  These stories are rarely as black and white as they appear and the difficulty the Church faces in responding to them is compounded by the decades that have passed.

Thank God the Church doesn’t air MY dirty laundry.  Could you imagine if your Confessions were announced to the whole world? 

Thank God the Church didn’t go to the media when a priest was a suspect.  Why?  For example, civil authorities often keep evidence under wraps until they’re ready to arrest/charge an individual.  The Church wasn’t “hiding” anything here… much like detectives in law enforcement aren’t hiding things when they don’t tell the media what they have and who they’re after.  Could you imagine ever getting a fair trial if something that was considered “evidence” against you wasn’t evidence at all and there was a perfectly good reason for that item to be where it was?  Unfortunately, if investigations weren’t confidential, there would be more people labeled criminals by public opinion then there really was.

The Church is pastoral in nature.  While there are avenues in which discipline is dispensed, it is typically to encourage repentance and a closer relationship with God.  Their concern is to save souls, and sometimes it’s a dirty job.  Remember, God reduced himself and reached down to where we are, and the Church does the same.

To “Sister” Maureen Paul Turlish, SNAP and other “Victims Advocates”:

Shame on you.  This is not the “advocating” that we abuse victims need.  This is another attempt to push YOUR agenda.  This smacks of greed and jealousy.  While I’m certain there is some fault to be had by someone up the chain, it is a disservice to blindly assign it to everyone near the problem.  You all have done so much damage to the victims who don’t want money or attention that they may never seek the help they need for fear of being labeled gold diggers.

The Church didn’t abuse children, the priests did.

Remember, as Catholics we’re not supposed to be ruled by our emotions, we’re supposed to rule our emotions.

Hindsight is ALWAYS 20-20 if not better, depending upon your lawyer.

Crimes are committed EACH DAY against our children in the public and private schools and especially against those children taken from their families for one reason or another.  These crimes committed in the secular world far exceed what has happened within the Church.

From what I have read and heard, most of the “abuse” cases involving members of the priesthood are between grown men and post pubescent/adolescent young men, (thus it is actually a form of homosexuality known as “pederasty.” not pedophilia).  Make no mistake, it is criminal, it is horrendous. I am the mother of a son, I would want the person that even attempted nailed to a wall.

Let’s keep a few things in perspective.  No matter the root of the sexual orientation of the priest, nearly all of these men swore vows of Chasity and Celibacy.  They were trained to be “shepherds that lead their flocks” not wolves that feed on the flocks. No matter what other “good works” they have done, there is the taint of sin.

Those that condoned, pardoned or covered up, are as guilty of the abuse, as those that did the act(s).  Those in authority that did not look into the matter, did not act upon reports are guilty, and those that brought pressure upon the real victims to recant are as guilty.

This includes those that abuse a child (even if that “child” is 17 years old) in the schools, youth groups or employment.  Not just within the Catholic Church.

I’m impressed how stupid we are sometimes, when we read something in a blog, or in a newspapper, and we belive all that they say, without thinking about that. Please, we need to be more serious. They want to attack Pope Benedict. It’s obvious. Nobody can see that?

I had said earlier in response to Sr. Maureen’s references to statements by Arch. Weakland, that her criticisms were clearly idealogically motivated, not factually based. Now that Weakland obviously has been actively trying to discredit the Pope on the newest NYTimes allegations, I reiterate my previous objections with even greater conviction!
Not only are people outside of the church trying to slander Pope Benedict…they are enlisting the help of disgruntled members within the church. I am amazed at Weakland’s transparent hypocrisy.

I am sick that the catholic press is defending this. How can this be? I am Catholic, and to me we need an OPEN look at this. And as for the public school problem, this does not excuse a priest forcing sex on a child and then being allowed to celebrate Mass!  Shame on you all, you must agree the Pope should face a crimal investigation like anyone else.
This has to come out in the open and thats the only way people like me will EVER trust the church again. Ever.

And Sister Weakland, there are many of us that thank God for your good work! Trying to expose this matter doesn’t make you a bad person, or against the Church. Those who try to cover it up and allow this to continue are the ones hurting our faith. If they have nothing to hide why fear the light of day?

Callie, would you have been one of the first ones to turn on the Church because of the sad example of Judas, one of the first apostles?

We’ve always had sinners in our church, but I aver that we have for more St. Francises and Mother Teresas than Judases.

The Pope has not been implicated, Callie. Don’t be so quick to throw him under the bus.

AND I am so GLAD the Catholic press is covering this, because I get the entire TRUTH from them, not just bits and pieces like from the NYT or CNN.

Thanks NCR!

Sure, Callie, pat sister on the back. I think you would have been doing the same to Judas and making excuses for him as he was taking money from the collection bag.

Callie,
Apparently you are not aware that Arch. Weakland admitted (only after an expose on morning TV) to affairs with male prostitutes and paying thousands of his diocese dollars to cover it up. Now he is criticising C. Ratzinger for not acting swiftly enough to defrock a priest whose criminal acts Weakland delayed informing the Vatican about for years…and he speaking out in many media outlets against the pope using flimsy allegations.
Since Weakland was a leader in progressive church circles and a critic of Benedict’s orthodoxy, it is hard not to interpret this (and Sr. Maureen’s) motivations as idealogically motivated rather than a pure concern for the victims of abuse.

Transparency is good…hypocrisy is not!!!

Also, Weakland recently wrote a book which was positively reviewed by the NY Times (they gave it a full page ) where he blamed church teaching for his own scandalous behaviour.

This is an immature person who hasn’t accepted responsibilty for his own actions, publicly critical of the man who has done more to change the way the church deals with sexual abuse than anyone!

Great information, EKA.

Way to go Catholic press and Catholic blogs getting the truth out!

From what I have heard, there has been hebephilia, not pedophilia in these cases.  They have mostly been man/boy relationships, making them in addition to hebephilia, homosexual.  This is why Pope John Paul II stopped allowing med with homosexual tendencies to become priests.  My father told me that when he was a young man, there was an idea that these men would make good priests, although I’m not sure what the reasoning was.

Callie, I invite you read this article, from a serious site.
http://www.zenit.org/article-28769?l=english

Please, don´t forget our Pope in your prayers.

It is concerning to think that even if Cardinal Ratzinger, on his election to the papacy, was totally and utterly unaware of any incidences in his past in which he failed to act against pedophile priests, the same could clearly not be said of Cardinals Groer, Law, Daly, Brady or Murphy-O’Connor (and others?) who at any time over the past decades could potentially have become pope themselves. Can it be disloyal for Catholics to question the leadership of the Church when this has been the way things have been allowed to develop - and is it reasonable to expect the media not to dig into Pope Benedict’s past when journalists are aware of these other cases?

It is completely reasonable to expect the media to do investigative reporting…that is their job!!
What is not appropriate is to take evidence and speculate about how these facts relate, draw your own unverifiable conclusions and present them in salacious headlines as fact…thereby destroying the reputation of a very important person and institution.

The media manipulated this information about our Pope to destroy his reputation and attack the Catholic Church, as they do always. Again I suggest you read this article that I mentioned before, and keep praying for Benedict XVI, and as well for this people who attack him. As catholics we should pray for our enemies and for those who persecute us, As Christ did.