ATLANTA — The National Review Board, formed to advise the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ response to the clergy sex-abuse crisis, released its report today at the bishops’ meeting in Atlanta.
The report, described by Cardinal Timothy Dolan of New York, the USCCB's president, as an “examination of conscience,” charted the steady decline in new cases of clergy sexual abuse and defended the zero-tolerance policy adopted by the bishops in the wake of the 2002 crisis. It also noted difficulties with boundary violations involving international priests and a lack of reporting about the presence of accused religious priests in a diocese without the knowledge of the local ordinary.
“There has been a dramatic shift in 10 years,” Al Notzon, the chairman of the U.S. bishops’ National Review Board, told the conference. “We have moved from a legal response to a pastoral response.”
Yet, despite all the progress in improving reporting of allegations and victim assistance, he added, the Catholic leadership has yet to secure the nation’s trust.
Every diocese, he said must be “scrupulous” in its adherence to the Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People’s guidelines on reporting allegations, background checks and annual audits of safe-environment training. “Those few cases that are not reported quickly become news,” he warned his audience, without identifying specific dioceses where a single misstep has resulted in a new wave of headlines broadly attacking the Church’s failure to protect children.
Bishop R. Daniel Conlon of Joliet, Ill., the chairman of the bishops’ Committee for the Protection of Children and Young People, confirmed that the conference would consider the board’s broad recommendations in an upcoming review of the charter.
Those recommendations incorporated policies aleady established in U.S. dioceses.
“It is incumbent upon the bishops to ensure the routine practices included in the 'Five Principles' adopted by the bishops in 1992, as stated in the charter and codified in the 'Essential Norms,' are followed," read a summary of the board's recommendations.
The practices include: "respond promptly to all allegations of abuse; promptly relieve the alleged offender of ministerial duties if the allegation is supported by sufficient evidence; comply with obligations of civil law; reach out to victims and families; and deal as openly as possible with members of the community.
“There are many recommendations coming from the 'Causes and Context' study."
"These should be viewed as the first conversations of an ongoing dialogue between the faithful and bishops,” the board’s statement concluded.
Following a year of explosive clergy sex-abuse scandals in the Archdiocese of Philadelphia and Diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph, Mo., Notzon’s comments and exchanges with conference members signaled a broad awareness that the missteps of one bishop could destroy years of common effort to rebuild public trust.
Notzon acknowledged the difficulty of maintaining a pastoral approach that placed victims first when the Church continues to address fresh lawsuits dealing with historic cases, amid unrelenting criticism from groups representing sexual-abuse victims and media outlets.
In answer to a question, he said the review board had not reached out to victims groups — and did not propose that any such initiative would be forthcoming.
He suggested that the body of work initiated by the conference — from its study of the causes and contexts of the sex-abuse crisis to its ongoing evaluation of candidates for the priesthood — were bearing fruit and served as a model for other religious groups and other organizations.
That said, Notzon acknowledged that the Church’s experience over the past decade revealed that a new policy of transparency and pastoral outreach left the Church more exposed to criticism.
Other churches and organizations look at “what happened to the Catholic Church,” he observed, and ask if they want to “get hammered.”
Meanwhile, within the Church, there has been ongoing criticism of the zero-tolerance policy, which calls for the immediate removal of any priest credibly accused of sexual abuse.
The board’s report acknowledged that the policy is “one of the more controversial requirements of the charter. Some feel this is too harsh if, for example, behavior occurred many decades ago.”
But the board determined that “this policy is in the best interest of children and the Church.” They pointed out that “convicted sex offenders cannot be police officers, Boy Scout leaders or teachers,” adding, “They cannot be allowed to remain members of the Catholic clergy functioning in public ministry either.”
The report noted that by 2004, “4,392 clerics had allegations made against them and an additional 1,723 clerics have had credible allegations made against them since then. Many of the accused are now dead.”
Today, Notzon proposed that more could be done to follow the practices of many U.S. corporations and update evaluations of priests in ministry to identify potential problems before they could do harm.
However, Bishop Salvatore Cordileone of Oakland, Calif., during a public exchange, expressed his concern that the zero-tolerance policy and other efforts to rebuild public trust could lead to a misunderstanding of the nature of the priestly vocation.
The issue of zero tolerance, said Bishop Cordileone, gets to the heart of priestly identity. "The priesthood should not be seen as a job or a career. … It’s a vocation.” Zero-tolerance, he said, is “much more like removing the father of the family from the home.”
He said he “was not suggesting an alternative approach,” but asked “that we not compromise the identity of the priest.”
The National Review Board also focused on “boundary-violation reports that involve international priests.”
“Behavior that might be culturally appropriate in one place may not be appropriate in U.S. culture,” the report stated.
It recommended further study and the development of “programs instituted to help international priests learn U.S. cultural ways, because boundary violations mimic grooming behaviors.”
The board recommended that the conference review any boundary violations made against any cleric.
Notzon said that boundary violations, which involve non-sexual behavior like hugging or kissing a child on the head, are a “murky area.”
Experts say that such behavior can sometimes signal a would-be predator’s effort to “groom” a child. But Notzon agreed that “there is confusion about how to define it.”
While U.S.-born priests are now trained to address problematic situations and avoid any appearance of boundary violations, many foreign-born priests who serve in the country have not received that training.
Bishop Conlon noted during an interview that he knew of no programs that provided such training to priests who received seminary training abroad.
“The problem is that we don’t have any built-in mechanism for providing this kind of orientation in individual dioceses, and the USCCB doesn’t provide any such programs.”
“Seminaries and Catholic universities are the kinds of institutions that have the experience and resources to offer these kinds of programs, and the question should be asked about why they are not doing it.”
The report released today “found the incidence of abuse began to rise in the ’60s, peaked in the ’70s and declined sharply in the ’80s.” Even cases from the past which are reported now, they said, “continue to fall into this same pattern” and that “the hundreds of cases reported yearly continue to fall within the timeline of the established curve.”
“These results do not mean that the hurt of the abuse is in the past,” reads the report.
The report confirmed nationwide adherence to the charter’s guidelines over the past decade.
“[P]rior to the charter, at least 25 dioceses/eparchies had victim-assistance coordinators (VAC); since 2002, all 195 dioceses/eparchies have them. The VAC assists the bishops in responding to those making allegations in ways that promote healing and reconciliation. The Church learned that responding to victims in a strictly legal manner did not help either the victims or the Church solution but the right thing to do and an integral part of the Church’s spiritual mission.”
The reporting of abuse allegations has also dramatically improved.
“Prior to 2002, at least 77 dioceses/eparchies had policies and procedures in place to respond to allegations of sexual abuse. Now all 195 dioceses/eparchies have such policies and procedures."
Further, the report found that U.S. dioceses uniformly implement codes of conduct to guide the interactions between minors and priests and other adults in Catholics institutions, and diocesan bishops routinely consult with lay review boards to decide “whether or not a cleric accused of sexual abuse should be reinstated or permanently removed from ministry.”
The report stated that “confidential settlement agreements with victims have been abolished except when requested by the victim."
Further, diocesan authorities are now “required to report all allegations of sexual abuse of minors to public authorities and to cooperate with any investigations on all matters of sexual abuse."
Victims of clergy abuse are now advised by diocesan representatives “of their right to make a report to public authorities. When one bishop fails to do so, the whole Church suffers.”
Joan Frawley Desmond is the Register’s senior editor.
Edward Pentin: Pope Pardons Gabriele, Appoints American as Promoter of Justice
Joseph Pronechen: Bishops Call for 'Rosary Novena for Life and Liberty'
Comments
Post a Comment
There are a couple of Elephants in the Room at least.
1 Boundary violations” are so widely interpreted in light of a “zero-tolerance” policy that is not defined and so a slap on the bottom or kiss on the forehead are equal to sodomy and rape.
2. The Bull Elephant is the earlier treatment of clergy who were offered no canonical support, or an opportunity to get a civil lawyer. Some cardinals and archbishops and bishops who totally ignored or did not know the civil and canon law ( a very common phenomenon, until some bishops were informed) so that hundreds of clergy were ” thrown under the cathedral.”
3. Some clergy were accused, found guilty by the bishop or a committee he consulted, no opportunity to defend themselves, with or without counsel. They were put on the bus and sent into exile as far from the Cathedral as possible. No salary, no insurance, no communication from their Shepherds. This underbelly of the Church’s activity stinks and cries to heaven for vengeance. It is like Syria now- innocent women and children are being slaughtered while Mrs Clinton talks down the Russians. Dallas has done its Damascus damage, so when all the priests are dead and forgotten the USCCB can wash hands and sing Alleluias. But there is a JESUS SHEPHERD who will be the final judge.
I object to this being called a “crisis”. In the time it took you to read the article, there were more children abused, physically, by public school teachers than all the priests and bishops in the last 50 years, combined.
In the history of the Church, this was a stumble in comparison to the secular public. This is Satan’s way of draining the Church of resources desperately needed for the poor and the sick.
Of course, there’s no room for Satan here in our Church, so we must root out the evil and make sure your family and friends know that we will crush this evil, as we always do.
When are the Bishops going to discuss disciplining their own? There are Bishops now serving who facilitated the cover-up by transferrng abusers, most especially auxiliary Bishops in Boston undet Cardinal Law Thsy now head other dioceses. Many devout Catholics would be more reassured if the Bishops were more willing to discipline their own now that they have addressed the problem among priests rather strictly, maybe even excessively so as Bishop Cordileone and the jate Richard John Neuhaus pointed out.
While seemingly great progress has been made to get the bishops to stop the covering-up abusing priests and I think many might be finally getting the idea that the right thing to do is the legal thing to do, along comes the Catholic Church quietly in the background pursuing a course of action to potentially escape financial culpability for the abuse cover-up.
In a much unreported case that is now before the US Supreme Court the “Roman Catholic Church and other religious groups [argue] that the First Amendment shields them from civil lawsuits for negligent supervision and retention of employees who sexually abuse children.”(
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/15/opinion/clerical-abusers-and-the-first-amendment.html
Even with a Catholic Majority on the U.S. Supreme court this should not pass, but the fact that Catholic bishops would pursue such a course of action makes one wonder have their attitudes changed towards this crime or are they seeking to still cover-up “for the good of the Church” a moral principle, the prevention of harm against children, that must remain inviolate.
Even if they win the case they may escape financial culpability but they will not escape moral culpability and until they stop actions like this, the bishops do not have my trust as I still don’t know if they syill value money over doing the right thing.
Rationalist, even if I could trust the NYT to report fairly on an issue related to the Catholic Church, that little 5-paragraph burb story isn’t much to go on; certainly not to the point of characterizing it as a church-wide indifference to abuse. Yes, victims should be compensated if they prevail in a civil case. No, that doesn’t mean it is a free-for-all pillage of diocesan resources and it is reasonable that there should some limits.
I simply do not understand how a One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church without error could be blamed for the actions of any of those at any level who violated its doctrines. It has proved tragic that God had to rely on weak and sinful humans to run His Church.
Bob There were no robots invented when Jesus decided to build His Church on humans beings, even His ROCK crumbled to sand at the trial and execution but was PETER at his own trial in Rome. So I rely on His judgment that HE knew what HE was about.
######More seriously I concur with Scott vis a vis Rationalist, even though I am like the Three Wise Men at Christmas, looking at the US Church from afar, I am very suspicious of any report in the anti-Catholic Church media, which includes the so-called (selectively) “liberal media” of the USA. I would read the original appeal and not rely on their spinned coverage of the case. See what they all did with the HHS story, “bishops vs women’s private parts.”
“The report released today “found the incidence of abuse began to rise in the ’60s, peaked in the ’70s and declined sharply in the ’80s.” Even cases from the past which are reported now, they said, “continue to fall into this same pattern” and that “the hundreds of cases reported yearly continue to fall within the timeline of the established curve.”
Read “Goodbye, Good Men: How Catholic Seminaries Turned Away Two Generations of Vocations From the Priesthood,” by Michael Rose for a well-documented explanation for what happened with seminary screening of applicants during this time frame. It is critical to understanding this issue.
The sin of homosexual relations is running rampant in society. People are very confused. Our children are under seige - especially children of the influential or children of believers. Most all children are being coerced into accepting it or treating it as normal or being made to question their own sexual orientation and are riddled with more doubt and self-esteem issues than other generations ever had to deal with. They are being blinded to the consequences of the sin and the damage to their souls. People who call the sin a sin are called uncompassionate, bigoted, hateful to silence them and most psychologists and psychiatrists refuse to address the mental health aspects of the sin because the sinners do not believe there is anything wrong, no ill effects to themselves and society, from their actions and they are tired of being made to feel there is. Corporations and government entities are using wages and promotions and work assignments to coerce employees to accept it. Some, maybe many, of our Catholic faith are trying to use authority to force believers to be silent or go along with accepting rather than addressing anyone that is under the spell of this sin, including and maybe especially priests. Anyone who does speak up is still often attacked. The Church is working to reform some priests known to be homosexual (Legionaries of Christ for example) and these men are still our spiritual fathers and shepherds and confessors. (While I would certainly try to help their healing and want them to be healed and part of the Church, I still struggle that they are shepherds while they are under the spell of the sin! Our spriritual leaders will answer to God for good or for ill for that.) The media, both secular and sometimes “Catholic” embrace the radical agenda, trying to make apples oranges or oranges, apples. Or they embrace the other extreme and make male/female relationships master/slave relationships that lead people to reject and fear marriage as the beautiful partnership it was meant to be. Even in this article, as Lone Thinker points out, a Christ-like action like a hug or a kiss on the forehead is seen as a “boundary issue” because of this sin. Parents are sour, tense and upset if a child is shown kindness and natural affection. They are tense around people who are a little different because society has no boundaries with this sin rampant. Who can be trusted? Who can’t? This is all very sick. In this policy of “Zero Tolerance”, I have to wonder what it is we won’t tolerate? We sure are tolerating alot of baloney in society. It sounds like we won’t tolerate Christ. We won’t tolerate any suffering. We won’t tolerate any discipline. We won’t tolerate that God has a plan. How can you live in fear and bring anyone to Christ? How can you live in shackles and call yourself freed by Christ? The Christ I know would hug and kiss foreheads and call the sinner to repentance without being embarrassed to say it. He would stand up to the public official and speak the Father’s Word. There has to be an openness to Christ. And if you think teaching stranger danger and separating children from hugs and kisses on the forehead is love you are mistaken and the fruit of it is showing throughout our society which Mother Theresa called the spiritually poorest. To protect ourselves we’ve become a nation of gossips and bullies.
Like the young rich man or the crowd that refused to believe we should eat His body and drink His blood, if the people weren’t ready to change, Jesus let them leave. We are trying to hold on to them. After they left Jesus stayed true to Himself and His Father. We are where we are because are not following Christ. We are following and accomodationg the world.
In order for there to be trust for all our clergy by lay people, there must be changes that go deeper, getting to the heart of why all this has happened. Most of the above is all talk, and little action. A strategy:
1- End mandatory celibacy for all clergy, allowing priests, bishops and popes to marry, if they so chose.
2- Implement church discipline for anyone that is living lives contrary to the New Testament letters:
a) Priests, bishops, nuns and other church leaders that are theological lone rangers are reined in or ousted, if they do not tow the orthodox line
b) “Catholic” politicians are called in by their bishops and educated about what the church says (regarding moral issues of the 5 non-negotiables) and if they refuse to hold true to them, they are excommunicated.
c) NO priest or bishop is to be having sex with anyone - not a child, another man or a woman. Any priest that is sexually active with someone else, OR HAS FATHERED ANY CHILD/CHILDREN is not allowed to remain in active ministry.
d) Any priest that has *admitted* to inappropriate behavior with anyone else (like a child!!) is not allowed to pass himself off as a respected member of the clergy, after he put himself into a monastery, for a life of prayer and penance. And YES - that is happening now. It is no wonder so many lay people do not trust bishops. Without real CHANGE in policy, it’s mostly just words.
The other elephant in the room is the money motivated pressure from risk insurers to settle with every accuser quickly, regardless of the guilt or innocence of the priest in question. See this article by a priest who presents eye opening revelations about that practice: http://holysoulshermitage.com/2012/05/29/the-judas-crisis-ncrrg-archdioceses/
Just started it yesterday Greg. To call it shocking would be an
understatement. My question is how and why the church hierarchy
allowed these seminaries to get by with such apostasy. Why wasn’t anything
substantial done to curb the heterodoxy of those in power by those in power. Where was the
the authority, the thing we as Catholics should expect, it being something
that is supposed to be unique in the Catholic Church as opposed to protestantism. The buck is supposed
to stop here.The only thing I can logically conclude is that they were sympathizers. I hate to believe it but
what other conclusion can one reach? When will the Catholic Media take a stand
against these Bishops? Personally I believe the bigger loss of faith experienced
by the laity during the last 30 or so years has come not from the individual priests
who molested these children, as horrible as that is, but from those in power who
sat idly by and did nothing. May God have mercy on their souls!!! And all that are complicit
in the cover-up and cowardice! As the old saying goes, “The only thing it takes for evil to
flourish is for good men to do nothing.” I pray I can do my part and “Be Not Afraid.”
Simply consider EUTHANASIA in place of CONTRACEPTION.
What if ObamaCare required all HealthCare Insurance to cover EUTHANASIA ... ???
Clearly, EUTHANASIA has NOTHING to do with a so-called ... WAR ON WOMEN ... !!!!!
Tom,
Look into the difference in public school figures on abuse versus Catholic figures on abuse. The 100 times more likely public school abuse is tossed around without seeing what counts as abuse in that study versus Catholic studies. A quarter of our cases involved penile or attempted penile penetration of largely boys (81%) according to John Jay. I believe figures given out for public schools include young teacher’s assistants flirting with high school seniors who are not much younger than them. In short I don’t think any group has done studies on both groups with similar criteria. In the NY area TV monthly has reports on non Catholic institutional abuse cases but actual real figures done with identical criteria probably doesn’t exist. Insurance companies have not charged Catholics any more than they charge other denominations for abuse liability insurance. Most likely with identical criteria, all groups are similar. The bad thing about Catholic abuse that is different is that those men were receiving the Eucharist during the time that they were abusing. The Eucharist is food against evil behaviour and yet such men failed to cooperate with its graces. The corruption of those with spiritual advantages is worse than the corruption of people who do not receive the Eucharist. So numbers….are not the root of the tragedy…our advantages in the spiritual realm are why our numbers should be much less than others, not the same as others.
“Posted by Terah James on Thursday, Jun 14, 2012 5:49 PM (EST):
In order for there to be trust for all our clergy by lay people, there must be changes that go deeper, getting to the heart of why all this has happened. Most of the above is all talk, and little action. A strategy:
1- End mandatory celibacy for all clergy, allowing priests, bishops and popes to marry, if they so chose.
2- Implement church discipline for anyone that is living lives contrary to the New Testament letters:”
Terah, I respectfully disagree with your #1 above. Being allowed to marry has NOT prevented sexual abuse by ministers in other denominations. In fact, the rate of abuse by clergy in other Christian denominations is higher than among Catholic priests. And the rate of abuse in our public institutions/schools is SIGNIFICANTLY higher still. Celibacy is NOT the problem. Celibacy, if lived faithfully and prayerfully, is a tremendous gift. Individuals unfaithful to their vocation is the problem.
Regarding your number 2 above, I completely agree.
In Christ through Mary,
Greg
I will consider the Church hierarchy to be serious on the subject of child a use when bishops are serving jail time for there complacence and incompetence in covering up the crimes against our children and grandchildren. I can pray for these supposedly holy men just as well in prison as on the outside. Prison does teach humility. Prisons have a way of dealing with pedophiles. And for one of you to say that the rate of abuse by Protestant or public schools is higher is not an excuse for a priest to ever do likewise. Ever!
Bill Bannon- what you described about the kind of abuse by priests that happened to young boys is immature. The age of the priests was at least 30 years old, at the time, and for many, it was in their 50’s and older.
They should be acting like grown-ups, not like experimenting teenagers. They should have self-control, if they are filled with the Holy Spirit. If they are at all attracted to males & are acting on their impulses, they need to be weeded out of the priesthood.
If they are acting out sexually, with man, women or by themselves (like with porn) it’s a problem. These are men the Vatican tells us are “other Christs” (alter Cristi). The behavior does not fit the description of the role they are to play in the church.
Christ would not get a woman pregnant, and then be a Dead Beat Dad. Yet, there are many priests that have done that, and in recent months, very high profile and “respected” priests have been outed for having fathered children.
No one expects a male teacher to behave like Christ. But we *should* expect our ordained men to behave like Christ; frankly, other laymen in the parish should be so influenced by the behavior of their parish priest that they should follow their lead, go home & behave like Christ too.
For the most part, that is not what we have. It scares me that on blogs, I’ve read that many of us know more about the Bible and about Church history than do our parish priests. Lastly, to Greg, celibacy is only a practice in the Latin rite that can be easily changed.
It is not like women’s ordination, that can (and hopefully will) never happen. The ordination of women priests is what brought down the mainline Protestant churches, and a key reason why reformed Anglicans are joining the Roman Catholic church, bringing their wives and families with them, embraced by their Catholic congregations.
I met one family once, and they’re great! I could have an intelligent conversation about Scripture with the newly ordained Catholic priest, and his wife was very sweet.
If you ever dealt with addicts- alcohol to sex to gambling you will see that the soul goes first and then the rest later-lies, denial, blame theft and total betrayal of friendships, commitment and co-workers. Those who are addicts in the sexual area can be married, single female or male and any age, some can be bi-sexual in their activity. That is why celibacy or marriage protects no one if there is addiction; or just ordinary attraction- that affects women and men also. Presuming that a believer whether cleric or lay is aware of the moral offense and can control it is a long way away until they “hit bottom” and seek help. The 12 Step programme has been adapted by every addictive group and its method has been very successful for many, even slips can be steps to further recovery, if the person continues the process which is a one day at a time approach. I commented above about the need for common sense, a female teacher who flirts with a senior student is not anywhere as serious as if she has sex with a 24-year old. The US bishops have used a zero tolerance policy which makes both offenses equal for clergy.
When Bill Donohue, founder and director of the Catholic League for Civil Rights, or I or anyone else who make the comparisons to married, single male or female rabbis or protestant clergy or public school coaches and teachers, we are doing several things:
1. Showing that being celibate or married has nothing to do with abuse and that pedophilia, an attraction to children is not the same as homosexuality
2. Media coverage has totally muddied the priest story and given the impression that all are abusers and all bishops and the Vatican covered up. Part of that goes to total misunderstanding of the actual control the Vatican has over bishops and clergy and the ability of the bishop to supervise parish clergy. 3. The actual abuse is apparrently worse therefore by not having fair reporting of all even when it is available. Glaring examples have been docunented.
###4 Jesus chose 12 spostles after spending the night in prayer according to Luke’s version. Question: A. Why did he choose Judas? b. Why did HE not throw Him out of His “seminary.” Saying Judas was programmed to steal and sell Him out is neither good Bible, nor good theology. Why do married men abuse their own daughters and impregnate them? The Mystery of Evil has been discussed by philosophers, theologians and athesists for ever. Our Catholic Christian answer is THE PASCHAL MYSTERY- JESUS took it all on, beat it, and we await His Second Coming to see how it all worked out.
“No one expects a male teacher to behave like Christ.” Married, single, abusing minors. They are out here in abundance. The Natural Law says we can figure out what is right and wrong so every human being is expected to obey it. ORIGINAL SIN can tempt anyone to violate it- regardless of education, rank or status.
LoneThinker - you only make mention of abuse of children by clergy. Do you consider it appropriate for a priest or bishop to father a child/or children, and then be allowed to continue in ministry?
Most recently, that is what has been happening. The Legion of Christ admitted last month that they knew a high ranking member of their organization fathered two children, yet, they allowed him to remain in his position, and to preach on ethics. Is that okay with you?
It was okay with them for years, until it was exposed, making the news last month. The priest in question is taking a year off to think of what to do next in his ministry. Seems he enjoyed fathering children, and likes being called “father” but being a father to his children, daily, is not too important.
About [sex] addicts, you wrote “the soul goes first”. I agree with you. Priests and bishops are to be men above reproach. Alcoholic clergymen that are left alone with ‘brother priests’ with their own issues or a bottle, is not healthy. The practice of mandated celibacy has never worked. The Latin rite needs to end the charade, allowing priests, bishops and popes to marry at any time in their lives. NO mandated celibacy for clergymen.
Let’s let our priests grow up, allowing them to be MEN. Responsible MEN. Jesus did NOT choose someone like Legionaries founder Fr. Marcial Maciel to be His apostle.
When I was notified of follow-up comments, Terah’s comment was attached to mine as if it was part of mine. It is not. I do not agree that the answer is allowing priests to marry. The answer is true love of God, desiring to grow closer to Him, God’s grace, the sacraments and personal holiness.
terah; The most scandal is caused by abose of minors- older boys by homosexuals, nuns seeking gratification, and children by pedophiles M and F. I would suggest you leave the decision as to who should be called by Jesus and those discerning the applicants’ call today. Jesus did not do very well with His first 12- Judas sold Him out, Peter denied Him, the 10 ran from the Cross, John stayed, they turned out pretty well. The HOLY SPIRIT is in charge of conversion of sinners, and Jesus of our final judgment. There are worse sins than fathering children out of wedlock and the violation of celibacy. Can you name them??
LoneThinker:
I’m glad you responded to me. Thank you. First, we are all sinners. While there are varying degrees of consequences for us personally for our sin, and to our society for our sin, ALL sin is sin, to a holy God.
The biggest scandal is not abuse by clergy to anyone. It is the cover-up by authorities that should know better because we know how our Church is supposed to function.
Look no further than the admission of cover-up by the Legionaries. There is a lack of church “discipline”. Bad behavior is not called for what it is, because bad behavior is ignored, and not addressed until it becomes public. It makes a mockery of our church.
Secondly, you wrote that Jesus “did not do very well” with His 12, in that Judas sold Him out, Peter denied Him, and the 10 ran from the Cross.
1- Judas sold Him out: Jesus’ mission from His Father was to die. Judas’ betrayed fulfilled Old Testament prophecy. So Jesus did very well, by praying to His Father, and selecting Judas.
2- Peter denied Him: that was BEFORE Pentecost. Peter did not have the Holy Spirit living inside of him. Peter made poor choices AFTER Pentecost too, but due to the church working together & bringing Peter back into alignment with what Paul was teaching, and with what we now know was to be from the beginning (regarding Gentiles being included in The Church), it worked. Peter’s poor choice is also an example for us today about how to handle Church Discipline.
3- The 10 ran from the Cross: again, BEFORE Pentecost. Steven, a deacon, was the first martyr AFTER Pentecost. Everyone needed to be supported by the others, praying together as a living Communion of Saints, in order for them to keep their faith in tact, to keep their focus on Jesus, and of His Command to them: The Great Commission of spreading the Gospel. Nero was bad news for Christians. Yet the 10 that ran were martyred, going to their deaths insisting Jesus had risen and was alive.
The WORST sin of all? Not obeying God.
Post a Comment
By submitting this form, you give The National Catholic Register permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.