The Independent News Source
NCR on Kindle - NCR classifieds - YouTube - Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
Printer-friendly version
PDF versionWhat victims hear in pope's talk on sex abuse
by Thomas P. Doyle on Dec. 21, 2010
Every time Pope Benedict XVI says something about the never-ending sex abuse nightmare, he inches closer and closer to the dark reality that has been like a black cloud over the church for more than two decades. And although he is slowly moving forward, he always stops short of the most important and no doubt for him, the most painful issue: the complicity of the world's cardinals and bishops.
With his talk to the assembled Vatican curia on Monday he showed courage in the presence of many who are still in denial, by admitting the extent of the violation of minors "to a degree we could not have imagined." I suspect that this admission was fueled in no small part by the explosive revelations in Europe especially the mishandling of a serious case during his very own watch as archbishop of Munich.
After that blunt admission Pope Benedict unfortunately retreated to the same set of excuses we have been hearing for years.
First, the focus is on the offending priests but never a word about the bishops whose culpability for the cover-up cannot be diminished because of a sexual disorder.
Second, he wondered what it was in the living out of the Christian life that allowed the plague to happen. It's not clear to me if he was referring to the clerical life or to the entire church. In either case his question is off base. He should have urged his audience and the hierarchy in general to ask what caused their understanding of the church to become so distanced from fundamental Christian values that bishops were willing to sacrifice the innocence of the most vulnerable for the protection of the institution. He could also have urged or better yet insisted that they all look long and hard into the style of episcopal governance that enabled hierarchs and priests to live under the delusion that because of their holy orders, they are above the law.
Third, he could have clarified that this is not a problem the responsibility for which rests on the entire church. It is not the laity's fault that priests abused and bishops enabled.
Fourth, the Holy Father should back off from persistently trying to attach some of the blame to secular society and what he sees as a perversion of morality. His statement that in the 1970s pedophilia "was theorized as something fully in conformity with man and even with children" is mind boggling. Whoever gave him that piece of nonsense should be fired. There have always been very small groups of people whose brains are so convoluted that they think sex with children is good for the children and good for society. Some of these people are still on the loose, such as the members of NAMBLA and not a few are long-term residents of correctional institutions. On this point a personal recollection: In 1971, I did several months training in a maximum security state prison. I vividly recall that the inmates most despised and most persecuted by other inmates were the child abusers. The "context of these times," child pornography, the sexual revolution and the other major targets of the era are not to blame for the existence of compulsive sexual disorders and they surely are not the reasons why the bishops intentionally stiff-armed victims. It is not a misguided secular culture that compels them to continue to protect abusive clerics in so many different ways, spending millions of dollars to defeat any proposed civil laws that would benefit all victims, and steadfastly refusing to disclose the documentary records of confirmed abusers.
Subscribe to NCR
Want to read more about important issues in the life of the Church? A subscription to NCR will keep you up to date and informed.
John Allen, in his response yesterday, "On the Crisis, does the pope have it right?" sums up the pope's theological argument: proportionalism. There surely was a lot of proportionalist thinking in the revolutionary '60s and '70s but it never surfaced as a reason why a priest or bishop systematically groomed and then seduced a victim. Why not try giving the proportionalist excuse another twist. If the morality of an action is never cut and dry but depends on the "good versus evil" of the circumstances, what can be said of those so-called church leaders who relativized the good or evil of disclosing a child rape by a priest against the good or evil of protecting the institutional church from a serious blight on its image?
Pope Benedict made another qualified breakthrough by actually thanking those who "stand alongside those who suffer and have been damaged." He singled out "the many good priests" but limited his gratitude to those who assist by helping victims restore their trust in the church and their "capacity to believe her message." I have tried to be a support for hundreds of victims over more than two decades … victims from several countries. Trying to reconcile men and women who have been raped or molested by priests, with the institutional church is nothing short of a particularly cruel form of re-victimization. The pope may have learned a lot about victims over the past few years but it's clear that he still needs to understand the profound nature of the spiritual damage done to them.
Benedict's praise for priests who have helped victims is an insult to the many priests, brothers, religious women and even bishops who have stood publicly with and for the victims and openly named the causes rather than sticking up for the institution. Every one of them has been either marginalized by the clerical culture, penalized by the system or as in the case of two bishops, forced from their positions by the Vatican.
Cheerleaders for the hierarchy lavish praise on the pope any time he speaks out about the sex abuse debacle. At the same time many of the same cheerleaders criticize victims and survivors who react with pessimism asking "will they ever be satisfied." These people need to know that the most important recipients of any papal message are the victims.
The pope's words must be seen from the perspective of the victims for to evaluate them from any other source of reference is to miss the point of why he is even addressing this topic in the first place. The credibility of any statement made by a pope or bishop stands or falls on the perception of those who have been devastated by abuse and those who have survived. In the beginning, and in the end, this is really only about them.
[Tom Doyle is a priest, canon lawyer, addictions therapist and long-time supporter of justice and compassion for clergy sex abuse victims.]
He says: "Trying to reconcile
He says: "Trying to reconcile men and women who have been raped or molested by priests, with the institutional church is nothing short of a particularly cruel form of re-victimization."
We certainly don't want anyone to be re-victimized, to minimize what happened to the abuse victims, to decline to make the changes necessary to minimize the chances of any abuse happening in the future, or anything like that. However... true healing only comes through Christ, through the Sacraments of Holy Mother Church. So as tough as it may be, it's only right that victims have every opportunity and encouragement (not coercion) to return to the Church if they left it, and to remain if they are still there.
Anonymous: Each victim of
Anonymous: Each victim of sexual abuse heals in his/her own way. Each finds a recovery path which works for them. (Except, sadly, those for whom the pain is too great and they cannot find peace.) You may believe that "true healing only comes through Christ," but you should not be so arrogant to assume we all share your religious beliefs. Many do not. If victims of abuse by Catholic clergy have a desire to become, or remain, a church member, they should be supported and respected in doing so. However, those of us who do not wish to be Catholic should be supported and respected as well. I was raped by a priest, as a Catholic child. I decided prior to the rape that I did not wish to remain Catholic. The reasons had nothing to do with clergy abuse. After learning about the protection of abusing priests by the hierarchy, and seeing the way the hierarchy and many priests have responded to the situation, I am even more confident in my decision to leave the church. I have no interest in "being healed" by or "reconciling with" the same institution which damaged me spiritually, emotionally and physically.
If you have true compassion and respect for victims, please do not continue to assume that you know best how we should heal and behave. Thank you.
Interesting that almost no
Interesting that almost no one reported being a victim till lawyers started bringing in huge settlements, just as no one is suing the women religious who beat and molested children during the same time frame. It seems that the best form of healing is cash and the main purpose of these posts is not to help people heal, but to wound the church as much as possible. How progressive.
Margart, I think that there
Margart, I think that there is some truth to what you say and I have been bothered by what I sense as some simply using this as a way to gain Financial reward. But you completely lose me when you brush with such a broad brush and dismiss the pain and suffering of so many because of the greed of some. This may satisfy a need to not to have to see a corruption and corsiveness in the Church. But remember that, we as Christians, are called to look honestly at where we have sinned. I don't suspect Christ expects any less from his Church. As a matter of fact, I suspect that Christ expects his Church to set the example.
I too, like you, have also been disappointed with some of these posts, but I also Believe that many are sincere and are expressing a righteous anger that is appropriate. With this concern of wounding the Chruch, I am left to ask, do you not see any behavior at all by the cleargy and hierarchy as wounding the Chruch or in your eyes, is it just the behavior of those you call progressives? I am also sorry that you see this as a reason to slight progressives, as the concern, even anger, of the safety of children should transend our political divide.
Yes, Margart I encourage to love and defend your church, but please do so with the humility that does not blind you to see her faults and failings as well as her many gifts. Like any love relationship, only then can you fully appreciate the true value of that which you love.
Peace and prayers to you and all who are on this journey to understand how deeply wounded our Chruch is and how we can help in bringing healing to all of the victims of Cleargy abuse, as only then will we bring healing to the Church.
John David
Dear John David, I am
Dear John David,
I am impressed by your comments.
I am also curious, why do you believe that some victims are greedy and are using their abuse for financial gain? I hear that often and don't see how one can fairly come to that conclusion. Could you explain your point?
Thank you.
"Interesting that almost no
"Interesting that almost no one reported being a victim till lawyers started bringing in huge settlements" This is a completely false statement. Many many victims and their parents reported abuse long before any settlements were handed out. It was the Church itself that forced the law suits because they refused to deal with either the complaints or the victims and their families.
The Church is no victim. In it's clerical face it has been predatory. Perhaps that's just too much truth for you to handle and that too is some of the collateral damage this crisis has inflicted on the laity.
Margaret, It is simply NOT
Margaret, It is simply NOT true that victims did not report abuse until lawyers starting bringing cases. Many, many victims reported abuse before cases were settled. And, there are many victims around the world who never sue. It would be helpful if you learned your facts before blaming victims.
You commented that most of these posts are not intended to help people heal. Your comment is one of those which does not help victims in any way. Your comments only serves to hurt victims. Was that your intent?
Ms. Fulton, You are incorrect
Ms. Fulton,
You are incorrect when stating that "almost no one reported being a victim until lawyers starting bringing in huge settlements." Many, many victims reported abuse before the settlements. Many, many victims never become involved in civil suits. And those who do sue have never expressed a belief that "the best form of healing is cash." Please, educate yourself on the facts regarding the clergy abuse situation as you clearly do not understand.
You mentioned that "the main purpose of these posts is not to help people."
The same can be said of your post. How are you helping anyone by criticizing those who sue, and being skeptical about victims' motives when doing so? It appears that your intent is to wound victims.
The answer to your question
The answer to your question Margaret is this: In the early days of the abuse scandal, police often refused to aggressively pursue criminal cases against priests, or were prevented from doing so because the statute of limitations had expired. Since they could not get justice in the criminal courts, they had no choice but to seek it in civil court. (Think the first OJ Simpson trial.)
Large financial settlements did more than make people money: They VALIDATED the victims' claims publicly. People were more likely to speak about the horrors of their own abuse once they thought there was a reasonable chance that someone might actually *believe* them--not just about the abuse itself, but also about the damage it did to their lives.
So yes, the large financial settlements certainly brought a lot of victims out of the woodwork, but I don't think it's fair to assume that this is because they were
a)liars
b)motivated solely by greed
c)the tools of those who wanted to destroy the Catholic church or,
d)lazy people looking to blame their failures in life on someone other than themselves
As a Catholic, I don't like my collection money being used to pay for the crimes of abuser priests and their enabling supervisors any more than you do, but I tend to side with the victims here.
From an abuse victim's point
From an abuse victim's point of view:
With due respect (as a brother/sister in Christ) Anonymous, you are missing the point here seriously. What we have in clerical sexual abuse is first and foremost a deeply psychological damage problem which has as its actors and stage, a religion, in this case the Catholic church. The affects of my abuse have not been able to be resolved at all and if not compounded by the church. It is not until I found a secular therapist that I have finally started to heal and trust me, I have tried in every way possible to find resolution and healing through the church - in my last attempt (30 years ago), the priest tried to seduce me during confession - that was the last time I tried - through Holy Mother Church. I did last year approach my bishop and was put on to Towards Healing (the body that deal with CSA in Australia). They helped to an extent and at least gave me the financial assistance needed to keep me and my family afloat for a little while while I heal. But, I am now only finding the healing I need through a good therapist who specialises in child sexual abuse and trauma recovery - Will I recover some form of 'religion'? Probably not. Will I be able to develop some semblance of spirituality again? I hope so, I hope so: So deep has been the knife cut I have often considered myself more atheist now than anything.
But still I tried to be a good Catholic but three years ago I had a big breakdown and I decided to make myself step outside the church as an adult in order to be able to properly view it from afar, as an outsider so to speak - I tell you, my eyes have been opened and the grief and confusion I have experienced as a result of trying to deal with not just the psychological effects of abuse but also in the coming to terms with how being my whole life of trying to be a 'good Catholic' has only aided and abetted me to cover up my own abuse: Indeed I now realise that my being a Catholic (as a CSA victim), I have more suffered under the church's weights of imposed guilt and deeply flawed culture of sexuality.
Well, I'm sorry, I now find it painful to even sit in a church. I was once a novice in a religious order and deeply loved my spirituality but it was pure escapism I am now sure. I recently went back to visit the monastery with my family - we actually stayed there for a few nights. I did once go into the chapel while there but just could stay there anymore - all the deep sense of guilt-laden culture which made me suppress my abuse and believe that it was all my fault and that priests and the church couldn't be bad, came crushingly in on me and I just had to leave.
I now know beyond any doubt that this desire to be a monk was my way of both escaping facing up to my abuse: Becoming a priest was my way of trying to be a better man than how I felt inside because of abuse AND the perfect way in a bizarre sort of fashion, of denying that it was the representatives of my church that did this - what better way than to become one.
So, I believe in your good intentions to 'encourage' the like of me to come back to Holy Mother Church, but until that church (well its hierarchy and central business district) can become psychologically mature and honest and jettison all the crustings of irrelevant, outdated and superstitious teachings and beliefs and deeply damaging perceptions of sexuality, let alone its boy's club and self-protective core, I want no part of it anymore. It doesn't look like, sound like or feel like it founder in any way shape or form. As an imperfect and damaged person, I do not and have really never felt at home in the church (hence my ever-present sense of guilt) and this is just so wrong.
Hope this helps explain things from a CSA survivor's point of view.
Stephen (member of Catholica) and AKA Oh Yet We Trust - look up the poem by Tennyson
More from a victims' point of
More from a victims' point of view.
You know, for what it's worth, what I see at play in all the way the church has dealt with CSA is the very unlevel playing field between the victim deeply affected by abuse and therefore, easily intimidated and confused, and those in power, with power, so much power that they know (and we know) that they, should they wish to, have the power and means to crush us like some Pythonesque foot as easily as an elephant can squash an ant.
Therefore, unless the 'elephant' can be totally trusted and be totally nonthreatening and totally accountable and open about who they are there for, there is always going to be the possibility of things going very badly in any case brought to the church and to the legal system.
If abuse is all about the imbalance and mis-use of power (and it is), then being dealt with by those with and in great power is always going to feel very threatening - the church, being the representative of Christ must have no desire and must not, at all costs express any desire or be seen or felt to express any desire (like Christ) be over-powering, to crush anyone, and the victim must feel this beyond any reasonable doubt. But, are they Christian enough to be like this, or, are they just a RCC Inc.
Sadly there is too much doubt around at present, and a hell of a lot of it is very reasonable to have, as to the motivations and intentions of those representing the church (both spiritually and legally), and, therefore, supposedly representing the Jesus many a victim comes to (consciously or unconsciously) for healing and understanding and help (and oh how spiritually and psychologically devastating this can be and is when the trust and hope needed to do this feels and is betrayed).
The power levels are completely skewed and all involved know this particularly those with the power. So, what is one supposed to do and think?
Jesus had enormous moral and inner power but he never never used his powers against powerless ones and they knew this beyond any doubt, reasonable or unreasonable, he never used it against those in need - that's why people felt safe with him and were finally free to open their hearts to healing and love AND deep reconciliation and conversion. The only people that were (internally) afraid of Jesus were those that had something at stake, to lose. But, they also knew they had the secular power, the legal muscle, so they, like a Pythonesque foot, crushed him. Or so they thought.
The great confusion in all the way the church has handled sexual abuse, NO, people who have been abused, is that it is so unclear as to who and what victims are dealing with when dealing with the church: Is it a huge Pythonesque foot or the hands and heart of the Jesus in whose name they exist? Until that becomes clearer and is known and felt to be clear beyond any reasonable doubt, nothing is going to change. And, it all just may well have to end in a Royal Commission (for us in Australia at least - I believe Belgium has just started a parliamentary commission into CSA).
I loved a line froma very supportive friend, about truth and reality, "until we start telling the truth we can't live in reality." That is something which is beyond any doubt for me.
May truth reign through all this deep confusion of these church and legal processes, and, through the intentions, motivations and cover-ups, for all involved. May abuse victims and all who live with them and/or support them, at least find some moral and personal, psychological, spiritual victory for and in themselves, if not a legal one.
Stephen
Pay, pray, and obey!Or is
Pay, pray, and obey!Or is it,obey,pay,pray? The not so holy roman catholic church is finally being crushed by it's own duplicity. They can try to salvage it but it's too late. I'm seeing yet more internet pictures of the Pontiff with babies motif. I told you.The senior citizen should have to clean a 'nappy' or two. You see sexual assault perpetrated upon children can get awfully messy, and as far as I can see the senior citizen they call 'holy' isn't a bit stained, apart from sitting in the CDF for TWENTY THREE YEARS reading the latest issue of Vatican Vogue and dreaming of the frocks he'd wear as CEO of the world's largest corporation. Just ask Fr. Gordon George, second in command of the Jesuits at the Vatican a while back. He wrote a paper on the Roman catholic church as a corporation.The world's largest.
And now gag orders on the clergy, all important (politically sensitive) matters will be monitored by the office of cro-magnon man ie: Sodano and his bunch.They think they're going to beat this thing. I think not.A year ago I attended Mass daily often joing a small group for Rosary afterward and eucharistic adoration if inclined. It's all over now. For the sake of my mental and spiritual health I am staying away.
God's grace and healing is
God's grace and healing is not limited to the sacraments of "Holy Mother Church". The Roman Catholic Church can be one route of healing. It is not the only route of healing. God is much bigger than what the RCC teaches.
This was an excellent
This was an excellent comment. I was about to say the same thing but you made this point very articulately.
Who are WE to presume that God only works through "Holy Mother Church?" Nothing is impossible for God.
Moreover, it is rather disturbing to hear such Catholic-centric comments because it indicates that the commentator does not even "get" their own Christian faith.
"...true healing only comes
"...true healing only comes through Christ, through the Sacraments of Holy Mother Church." You need to educate yourself about the spiritual damage resulting from being abused at the hands of a religious leader, in my case, a priest. This abuse vaporized my Catholic faith when I remembered decades later. The consecrated hands forced oral sex on me. Ask the survivors what they need, not what you think they need. Some of us may go back to the Church, but don't approach us with this suggestion.
It's the institutional church
It's the institutional church that needs to be reconciled with the victims of sexual abuse, particularly the vicitms of childhood sexual abuse.
I agree that "trying to reconcile men and women who have been raped or molested by priests, with the institutional church is nothing short of a particularly cruel form of re-victimization."
Yes, the Sacraments are a
Yes, the Sacraments are a primary instrument of God's grace in the world. Unfortunately for many victims, though, those Sacraments have been perverted as part of the abuse.
Baptism? This has been perverted by priests and bishops in the sense that the children who were abused where not considered children of Christ, were not seen as important parts of the Church community. And further, what the priests and bishops have done is to introduce the very evil and Satanic acts that we claim to deny in the baptismal ceremony.
How can one experience the grace of forgiveness in Reconciliation when a priest abused them in the confessional as a youth?
How can one contemplate the grace of marriage when the unique expression of love in marriage, sexual union, has been used as a tool of abuse?
How can one value the role of the priest in the Church when that priest's hands, the same hands that consecrate the Eucharist, groped a child?
How can one respect and listen to the teaching authority of the anointed bishops when those bishops have utterly failed in their leadership time and time again?
What point does Confirmation have when those abused at the hands of the Church would not want to be considered adults of such an organization? And to be anointed by a bishop?
How can one experience the healing of Anointing of the Sick for the injury done to victims, when to do so they would need to publicly display the fact that they are "ill?" Why dont the priests and bishops do formal public penance?
What we need is for Benedict and the bishops to follow the example of King Henry II, and allow themselves to be literally flogged on the steps of St. Peter's basilica.
"What we need is for Benedict
"What we need is for Benedict and the bishops to follow the example of King Henry II, and allow themselves to be literally flogged on the steps of St. Peter's basilica".
It is truly fitting. Just as they have publicly flogged women and men for centuries for their "disordered lifestyle". Only to hide themselves behind a veil masking their own perversion and Satanic cruelty to the ignorant, weak-minded, the emotionally distressed, and the vulnerable, particularly children.
That's like a person who had
That's like a person who had been brutally beaten by a vicious gang and who, upon being released from the hospital immediately returns to the gang for comfort. The "Holy Mother Church" is nothing more and nothing less than a sick, twisted abusive organization and the only remedy to this crises is for the hierarchy to be completely dismantled and the real Church, founded by Christ, be returned to the laity.
Fr. Tom Doyle is to be
Fr. Tom Doyle is to be thanked and praised for his courage to speak out. If only we had more priests like him and less of the vast majority of priests who just stand back and say nothing against the hypocrisy of this hierarchy! If that were to happen, THEN we would have a Christian church and not a Roman church. Fr. Tom Doyle is the type of LEADER that Christ demands, and not the whimpering poor souls that generally occupy the clerical state. Thank you, Fr. Tom Doyle!
"His statement that in the
"His statement that in the 1970s pedophilia 'was theorized as something fully in conformity with man and even with children' is mind boggling."
-----------
It illustrates quite clearly how so many priests and bishops regard the issue.
If the Holy See had any
If the Holy See had any creditability left, it just evaporated with that remark. Is there a spin doctor out there who can tell us what he was really trying to say?
Actually, in Europe there was
Actually, in Europe there was a movement on the left after 1968 to normalize pedophilia. The various efforts to bring pedophilia into the mainstream are probably what the Holy Father had in mind here.
Don't believe me? Check out the following article which was published in Der Spiegel and, therefore, cannot realistically be charged with harboring some sort of conservative bias:
http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/0,1518,702679,00.html
RJM: Yes, there is no
RJM: Yes, there is no question about it; some factions on the secular left wanted to normalize pedophilia. Such groups also operated within the priesthood itself, i.e., "St. Sebastian's Angels." It was a website run by priests during the 1990's. It promoted pedophilia; and after a long run, I believed it was shut down by a bishop.
The problem I have is that it now appears the Holy See is trying to use secular movements to mitigate evil actions which occurred within the Church. If I'm understanding this matter accurately, how can I look to Church as my moral compass?
I assume what he was trying
I assume what he was trying to say is that the Viet Nam Era was a time when all sorts of societal boundaries were being breached, and an attitude created enshrining personal freedom to do whatever one wished to do, provided one could rationalize oneself into believing it harmed no one else. NAMBLA style pedophiles would have felt themselves newly free. One thing we may be sure of: pedophile slime's version of introspection sees itself as doing nothing wrong.
I was an adult then, returning from military service (finding myself abandoned by spouse), and rather disenchanted with government 'wisdom' on the War and by extension other issues. I can see what the man was saying in that the societal loosening of those days really shocked a bunch of formerly Roosevelt-style Liberal German-American people into conservatism. Such people would logically include ministers of most all flavors, not excluding priests, not excluding then Fr. Ratzinger. As freshly minted Conservatives, they tended to exaggerate societal laxness around them. Exaggerating it into seeing sexual manipulation of young people as much more common than in fact it was could readily follow.
"If the Holy See had any
"If the Holy See had any creditability left, it just evaporated with that remark. Is there a spin doctor out there who can tell us what he was really trying to say"?
Ever heard of Fr. Z?
Let us all pray for the
Let us all pray for the victims of the abuse.
My fantasy, on a good day, is
My fantasy, on a good day, is for the pope to order his minions to bring-in Tom Doyle for an audience where he appoints Tom to be in charge of the Vatican's response, with the full authority of the papacy to act and make decisions, to the sexual abuse and exploitation of children by priests and the complicity of bishops and cardinals.
Tom Doyle, a Dominican, can finally reclaim the "Inquisition" from maniacs like Torquemada now as an instrument of peace and reconciliation.
Then, I wake up from my revery, and I see the face of the puny Panzer pope, and I realize that as long as B16 is pope the church will continue to roll over the edge into the abyss.
Jim, I completely identify
Jim, I completely identify and concur with your fantasy.
"Oh yet we trust that somehow, good shall be the final goal of ill".
Stephen
Be they left or right, these
Be they left or right, these monsters amongst the clergy belong before a firing squad. They want to become martyrs? Give them the opportunity to have their wish.
As always Tom Doyle is on
As always Tom Doyle is on target. But I would like him to be more specific as to just what changes there must be in the "Clerical Culture"? For example, what list of concrete changes would he recommend to the candidates in the next conclave?
Pope Benedict in his 2010
Pope Benedict in his 2010 Christmas Greeting goes no further than the “sins of priests.” Regrettably, he stops short of speaking of those “sins” as the mortal sins and crimes they truly are.
More than that, he neglects to address the sins and crimes of the bishops who enabled and facilitated those sexual predators, thus putting untold numbers of children in harm’s way -- children who would never have been sexually molested by individual priests had the bishops acted with the barest of due diligence.
In the past, cardinal archbishops have spoken time after time about the sexual abuse of children by predatory priests as an “American problem” or a “homosexual problem” in an attempt to mitigate the seriousness of what was happening.
Former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum blamed it all on the permissiveness of those New Englanders in the Archdiocese of Boston, Massachusetts!
One remembers as well that when the studies on the sexual abuse of women religious were reported in the secular media some of those same churchmen sought to limit the scope of the problem geographically.
As has been shown in diocese after diocese in the United States and now throughout the world, the protection of the “Lord’s little ones” was not the bishops’ primary concern. In fact, it was of no concern. The responsibility for the crimes of rogue priests and enabling bishops does not lie with the People of God.
Pope Benedict's theological argument citing proportionism is just one more rather sophisticated attempt at placing the blame elsewhere and it does not wash.
Yes, “only the Truth saves,” but it appears once again that the pope uses words that attempt to excuse the very real evil that has been perpetrated on the innocents and thus mitigate the responsibility of bishops. The abuse of episcopal power and authority is what needs to be named and addressed by the pope and yet he has not done so.
Pope Benedict says, “We are well aware of the particular gravity of this sin committed by priests and of our corresponding responsibility.”
Can that possibly be so when an equal if not more serious part of the “sin” continues to be ignored or at least unspoken? I don't think so.
It is the bishops’ abuse of power and authority that has raised the church’s continuing sexual abuse problems to the level of scandal and yet no bishop in the United States has been disciplined or sanctioned in any way for his part in protecting and enabling known sexual predators.
As far as Archbishop Bernard Cardinal Law is concerned he could hardly have stayed on in Boston having completely lost the confidence of his priests.
No bishop’s resignation has been requested in the U.S. and there are more than a few whose actions are as bad as or worse than the actions of some of the Irish bishops whose resignations were accepted by the pope.
Excuses such as the “context of the times,” which the pope speaks of are just that, excuses that in no way mitigate the pure evil that was visited on children and young people by narcissistic sociopaths.
Both the acts and those perpetrating such perfidy were evil and the bishops have a grave responsibility for their part in enabling and facilitating such abuse.
It is not that there is something “wrong in our proclamation,” of the Christian message but there is a dissonance between the “proclamation” itself and what the bishops were and actually are doing; enabling and protecting rogue priests then, and viciously opposing statute of limitation reform now that would better protect all children.
The bishops were and are, to a large extent, proclaiming one thing but doing something directly opposed to the Gospel message.
Do as I say not as I do still appears to be the mantra of the day.
No matter how dressed-up the words are, the abuse of episcopal power and authority is at the heart of this scandal.
Sister Maureen Paul Turlish
Victims' Advocate
New Castle, Delaware
maureenpaulturlish@yahoo.com
Right on. Thanks.
Right on. Thanks.
Sister Maureen - You have put
Sister Maureen - You have put your finger on exactly the issue that is at the heart of all the church's troubles - the sins of the hierarchy. in fact, I believe it is the magesterial system that is the cause of so many of the church's problems. Why are there so few bishops or cardinals who are willing to speak prophetically about the abuse of power perpetrated by their fellows? Silence is complicity.
Susan Fox
Very true, Sr. Maureen: "The
Very true, Sr. Maureen: "The responsibility for the crimes of rogue priests and enabling bishops does not lie with the People of God."
I take your use of "responsibility" to mean culpability and accountability for what has been. The blame, in other words, for the failures of bishops and for the systematic failure of the institutional Church to respond appropriately to victims and to embrace the need for corrective action by the Church, rests squarely on the heads of the power brokers of the institution. Amen to that.
On the other hand, if there is any hope that Church might come through this crisis healthier and as a more faithful servant of Christ's mission, it requires a fundamental change in its structures of power and responsibility. The future of the Roman Catholic Church as a servant of God, if it has one, depends on the essential empowerment of the laity. The People of God MUST come to shoulder appropriate responsibility within the institution. Don't you agree?
Such fundamental changes in our self understanding and behavior will not come easily, however. Applying an old adage, are we not realistic to expect that "(learning to be a healthy, faithful and fruitful church) will make a bloody entrance"?
God help us.
I do agree, Mah 11.
I do agree, Mah 11.
"The future of the Roman Catholic Church as a servant of God, if it has one, depends on the essential empowerment of the laity. The People of God MUST come to shoulder appropriate responsibility within the institution. Don't you agree?"
I think it is naive to think that the institution will initiate the changes needed all by itself. This is where grass-roots movements come into play, especially the movement for an American Catholic Council.
A visit to the site - www.americancatholiccouncil.org - is worthwhile and should lead to fruitful discussion.
There are Canon Laws that address this including -
"All Catholics have the right to express publicly their dissent in regard to decisions made by Church authorities."
(Canons 212:3, 218, 753)
God knows the hierarchy has failed the People of God in enabling, protecting and covering up for the sexual predators in its ranks saying it was "saving the Church from scandal." Many continue to do so in failing to be accountable and transparent notwithstanding the recent remarks of Washington's Cardinal Wuerl yesterday.
Donald Wuerl, the cardinal archbishop of Washington appeared yesterday on "Fox News Sunday," and spoke about the great success of the church in responding to the its continuing sexual abuse crisis.
Wuerl said, "we have succeeded in guaranteeing that if a priest is accused, and there is a credible allegation, he is simply removed from the ministry. That is reported to the authorities, and we begin to try to heal whatever was damaged in that abuse."
"Guaranteeing?" Some dioceses have a better track record than others on this but to say "we have succeeded in guaranteeing" anything is wishful thinking but not factual.
"Great accomplishments?" More like revisionist history to my thinking.
"Dealt with it forthright?" I don't think so.
"Moved on?" Really?
Didn't Bishop Wilton Gregory, then head of the USCCB, make the same kind of a statement in 2003?
Wuerl's attempts at revisionist history are like those of so many bishops who would also like to say that the church has "moved on to see that we're in a much, much better place, a much safer place today," but the facts simply do not support those statements certainly not when so many bishops refuse to list convicted, credibly accused or known sexual predators on their diocesan or parish websites.
The majority of bishops neither recognizes nor is willing to work with groups like Voice of the Faithful. It is hard to accept such unwillingness when the pope has stated that "everything possible" should be done. Such an attitude reinforces for me that too many bishops remain mired in the "Do as I say not as I do," modus oprerandi.
Sister Maureen Paul Turlish
Victims' Advocate
New Castle, Delaware
maureenpaulturlish@yahoo.com
Sister: Why haven't the
Sister:
Why haven't the Leadership Conference of Women Religious addressed the issue of abuse by women religious? Why is it that nuns like you love to beat up on the men: the pope, the bishops and the priests but avoid complete responsibility for the decades of physical, verbal and even sexual abuse that thousands of Catholic sisters impose upon us when we were in Catholic schools? How many generations have suffered at their hands all in the name of discipline and morality? Many were sadomasochists, who thrived on power and dominance. You are always pointing the finger at the men but rarely do you and other women religious look at your own responsibility in this scandal. How many women religious covered up these pedophile priests because these men were the ones who gave them positions of power in their parishes? How many sisters remained silent because they were more interested in power of office than helping victims? How many stories are there, how many victims there have been who paid dearly throughout their lives because these so called religious sisters who belittled us, made fun of us, abused us verbally and some physically, but the so called advocate for victims, remain silent. You are a hypocrite!
And sister, one day our stories will be heard as well. What I would like is to have a victim area in your national display of women religious where we can tell the whole world just how these so called glorious sisters of the past also abuse many of us and our brothers and sisters and we are still paying the consequence of their abuse. What about our pain?
Why would she bother with the
Why would she bother with the truth when it interferes with the LCWR man-hating agenda? It is all about power and control to them. They can care less about the victims--and they have shown that at the last few LCWR meetings. They sat inside probably whining about the apostolic visitation of the orders and the investigation into the LCWR heresey while victims were outside begging for a chance to speak. But admitting they were wrong would not help them "sing a new church into being"--one where they are in control! Every time any of these professional victims advocates opens their mouth they show more and more hypocrisy. They are all either out for money like SNAP or power like LCWR.
Once again she conveniently
Once again she conveniently leaves out mother superiors, prioresses, leadership teams, etc of female religious orders. I guess it was just an oversight--one that happens every time she comments. Why let the truth get in the way?
Well said, Fr. Doyle.
Well said, Fr. Doyle. Benedict XVI and his henchman have not come to terms with this crisis. Unfortunately, that means it will continue.
Tom states very eloquently,
Tom states very eloquently, directly, and tactfully what can be summed up in a single, albeit less tactful sentence:
"It's the survivors, stupid."
"The pope's words must be
"The pope's words must be seen from the perspective of the victims for to evaluate them from any other source of reference is to miss the point of why he is even addressing this topic in the first place. The credibility of any statement made by a pope or bishop stands or falls on the perception of those who have been devastated by abuse and those who have survived. In the beginning, and in the end, this is really only about them." Thomas P. Doyle
I think this is the most important, most critical factor being ignored in the sexual abuse disaster. It is easy for those of us not affected directly to say "What more do they want?" In truth, it is not ours to say what "they" want or decide when or if they have received it. But I think we will all know it if it ever happens.
I will take the Pope's words
I will take the Pope's words over those of Thomas Doyle any day of the week and twice on Sundays..
(Mostly because nobody can trust a man that writes for NCR)
WOW! With an open mind like
WOW! With an open mind like yours TM, you must be a cardinal.
Oh, how silly can one be. Why
Oh, how silly can one be.
Why do you even bother to read NCR then?
TM, keep drinking the
TM, keep drinking the Kool-Aid. None for me thanks.
Can you deny the abuse and
Can you deny the abuse and cover up ? Also how does the 'pope' intend to address the 'VICTIMS' who did not survive ?
I would agree with you But
I would agree with you But then we would BOTH BE WRONG !
TM, I will pray for your
TM, I will pray for your closed mind. Fr. Thomas Doyle should be praised and NCR for they speak the truth.
Fr. Doyle has the true gift of "empathy" of one who is able to feel with another as if he has "walked in the shoes," and that is truly a gift from the Lord. All can see the reality of the Church as it is, sadly, it is a flawed church and has not taken responsibility for its sins and just keeps making excuses. The church is like an alcoholic who has not admitted to being one and until the church realizes its state, no change will take place, only excuses will continue.
The church(hierarchy) are human beings and as humans are flawed as we all are, no way of getting around that--being in that position does not eliminate the fact that one does not sin. Mostly, on a daily basis I pray that the "hierarchy of the church does not fail to listen to the voice of the Spirit because of their humanness. "
Tom: Hope to see you around
Tom: Hope to see you around Falls Church again soon.
Now to the points mentioned above. Whenever good people like you question this or that aspect of this nightmare they almost invariably come back to the point of the failed shepherds abandoning the most vulnerable young sheep in the flock. I think my good man, you miss the point.
Good people like you see these episcopal sharks as shepherds. Abuse victims like me see offending and complicit nuns, priests, brothers, bishops, cardinals and lay people in power as simply "yes" men and women who would do or say anything to keep the ship afloat. These people are no more godly or episcopal or annointed or special or Christian than your average timber wolf. They will ravage anything that they believe will threaten their environment. They protect the institution out of a reflex to keep their perks and privileges intact. They are evil. Period.
I think you are being unfair
I think you are being unfair to timber wolves. Wolves actually protect the young of the pack with their very lives.
Yes, and it's laughable to
Yes, and it's laughable to hear B16 talking about change and reforms to a bunch of codgers in scarlet who've been in office during the worst of these scandals nervously wringing their hands and fingering their pectoral crosses while he was speaking from the golden throne. Wondering what bombshell our Pontifex Maximus was about to drop on them.
The only real reform will come from those who've had quite enough of these empty gestures. It isn't about to come from a decadent body of self-serving curial hacks, and their pontifical clones who either aided the wrong doers, or slept through it all. Now careful to protect ill-earned honors and privileges.
Catholics awake!! The hour is at hand.
Thanks Fr. Doyle for this
Thanks Fr. Doyle for this post. It seems to me that the pope named the problem. His discernment about the cause is completely inadequate.
Excellent article Father
Excellent article Father Doyle. I hope that the Pope will have an opportunity to read it and think about how he can really make the bishops and cardinals and the others in authority in the Church who enabled this sexual scandal by protecting the institution instead of restoring honor to the Catholic church.
This is an excellent article.
This is an excellent article. I agree wholeheartedly with what Father Doyle has said.
Bless you - makes sense to
Bless you - makes sense to me.
Well said! Amen
Well said! Amen
Once again, thank you so much
Once again, thank you so much Tom Doyle for being able to fully and accurately express what so many victims/survivors/sufferers of clerical abuse have experienced and continue to experience but can't always find the words for themselves. This line particularly stood out for me - it is so true: "The pope may have learned a lot about victims over the past few years but it's clear that he still needs to understand the profound nature of the spiritual damage done to them."
Thank you - If there is one thing I need it is to be released from the power represented by those in power within the institutional/hierarchical or clerical 'church' has had over me, a strange psychological hold it infused in me by abuse and now an unwillingness or ability to truly empathise and thereby release me from the past. I have had many Catholics support me but I need the open and complete support of those in power within the church - until this happens that power feels like it abusively against me and not for me. As such any spirituality they represent has lost all meaning. I am not sure if people will understand what this means. Sorry, can't explain it better.
Stephen (member of Catholica)
Dear Stephen, you describe a
Dear Stephen, you describe a psychological state that probably MOST Catholics of a certain generation find themselves in. I think it was Aristotle who wrote, "If you want to find yourself, think for yourself." After years of professional training for my 30 year work with addicts, I have come to the conclusion that much of the early 'education' that Catholic children received was definitely a form of brainwashing for entrance into a cult.
"........there is one thing I need it is to be released from the power represented by those in power within the institutional/hierarchical or clerical 'church' has had over me...." You have identified the problem EXACTLY. You need to practice original thinking and break that hold that the institutional Catholic Church has had on you for your entire life. How to do that? Education is power; your mode of thinking has been kidnapped by the power, dogmatism, and legalism of the Catholic tradition. My suggestion would be to end ALL Catholic propaganda and devote yourself to Christian thinking and reading that stresses LOVE and FREEDOM to be CREATIVE.
If attending Catholic services makes you anxious and ill at ease, STOP attending and free yourself to find a community that nourishes and strengthens your longing for Christ. This is NOT some sort of sin but rather an attempt on your part to find yourself [as Aristotle suggested].
Thomas Merton, the great Trappist monk, wrote on this topic when he found himself in such a situation as yours, 'know that there are two angels guarding your way: acknowledged ignorance and hopeful insecurity." Freedom to think for yourself is the lifeblood of any follower of Jesus. Dogmatism, legalism, propaganda, fear, ritual, and negativity are all death to the Spirit. Unite yourself in love with Jesus, and the Spirit will free you.
Romano, I deeply appreciate
Romano, I deeply appreciate your reply - thank you. What you have written has so many serendipitous elements - I will mention 2:
"If you want to find yourself, think for yourself." and "find a community that nourishes and strengthens your longing for Christ". The "Catholica" group I mentioned in my signature is an online community which has been the only one that has helped me and supported me to do just that, and, to also allow me to vent and express and cry and work through all the stuff in me that has been suppressed and encrusted with decades of Catholic guilt and cultish power and teachings. I am so grateful for them. Had it not been for them and my doctor and my wife, I'd be dead, truly.
"Thomas Merton, the great Trappist monk, wrote on this topic when he found himself in such a situation as yours, 'know that there are two angels guarding your way: acknowledged ignorance and hopeful insecurity." "
(Almost became a Cistercian myself and loved Merton's writings) My mum (bless her) is a simple faith-filled woman, always down to earth and she always told all of us 10 children that we had 2 guardian angels (we had to, she didn't have the time to look after us all, all of the time). Now I know the 'names' of those 2 guardian angels, "acknowledged ignorance and hopeful insecurity" and I LIKE it - you don't know how you have hit the nail on the head for me in this. I love the fact that these angels are also much the spirit behind my signature name/poem, 'Oh Yet We Trust' by Tennyson. Look it up because I'm not sure if it will fit in here.
So thank you for these words of support and wisdom, they are much appreciated.
As for "Unite yourself in love with Jesus, and the Spirit will free you" I used to be involved in the Charismatic Renewal and had a sense of this deeply - it has gone now and has been gone for a long time, but somehow I am not troubled by this - I had a sense many years ago of God saying "don't be concerned with pushing to improve your spiritual life at the moment; I'll look after that (sort of in secret, a la John of the Cross) get the psychological healing you need, that's what's most important right now".
And that's what I am doing.
Stephen
Thanks a lot, Stephen. I
Thanks a lot, Stephen. I checked out Tennyson's poem too. I also like your insight about not "pushing" to improve your spiritual life. I think I see a similarity there with what Tennyson is saying. I think all of us just need to be open to what is happening in our lives. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
There's a lot of wisdom in
There's a lot of wisdom in the comment and your reply. To take it a step further look at how priests and religious are 'educated'. In most cases, it is education to reinforce the RCC's 'dogma' in a manner that is a delusion of thinking for oneself. This begins at the earliest stages and continues throughout the life of the priest or religious. They are completely convinced they are acting independenetly and making their own decisions while all the time the system or culture they live in and which protects them, as long as they do not question the delusion, constantly reinforces their ignorance.
Stephen strains to say
Stephen strains to say something, but what is a matter of wonder. "Dogmatism, legalism, propaganda, fear, ritual, and negativity are all death to the Spirit."
You forgot the kitchen sink, didn't you?
Seriously, how did you come up with that list of evils? And how does "ritual" fit the pattern of the others? Or did you just need a word like that to fit the metre you were straining?
Ritual=death? That's an overreach.
As Robert Frost said to a
As Robert Frost said to a group of graduate students at Harvard that were questioning his use of a particular word in a poem, and wondering if he used it just for the sake of rhyme, "You can't accuse me of that. I had a real reason for that word."
I used 'ritual' deliberately. Ritual is a form of superstition and idolatry, perhaps one reason why Jesus said, "I do NOT want your ritual but rather your hearts." From my perspective, that is what all those words have in common; they are all used to suppress freedom and creativity in venturing towards the divinity.
The Spirit of the Divine came that we may have life and have it to the full, according to Jesus. So, anything that attempts to limit or control that Spirit is in opposition to the new way of Jesus and is part of the old religions, such as Judaism. Anything that gets in the way of friendship/love with Jesus, is an obstacle and needs to be jettisoned and not clenched to out of a sense of fear. God is Love, not rote ritualistic behavior.
Well, it seems perhaps that
Well, it seems perhaps that you have fallen victim to your own agenda. In the first place, I'm not sure where you have read of Jesus saying such a thing. Perhaps you are remembering (loosely) Mark 7:6.
Or are you confusing a Gospel passage with Isaiah 1:10-20? or Isaiah 43-44?
Good grief--what do you make of Jesus' own adherence to ritual worship? In any case, you have greatly overstated the case against "ritual" by inserting your own words in Jesus mouth.
Come on. The fact is that for all its faults, and they are legion, one of the greatest gifts that the Catholic Church offers is the power of its public prayers. In their proper place, rituals are wonderfully powerful and healing. Don't knock it till you've tried it.
Every time Joseph Ratzinger
Every time Joseph Ratzinger opens his mouth on this topic, toads come out of it.
@ Molly
@ Molly Roach:
"Toads-out-of-the-mouth"! That is very funny. So Book of Exodus with the ten plagues. Like Moses, our prayer should be to the hierarchy, the pharaohs of our day : "Let my people go!"
Are you related to the eloquent and articulate Dr. Roach who comments on NCR especially on medical ethics and practice, and the non-ethics of American bishops who have "Elitist Mitre" syndrome?
Keep the humor coming! We sorely need it!
"His statement that in the
"His statement that in the 1970s pedophilia "was theorized as something fully in conformity with man and even with children" is mind boggling. Whoever gave him that piece of nonsense should be fired."
So true! My father was not a theologian, but he would have (rightly) broken the face of anyone coming near his children with that hogwash! The pope would have been better served by consulting some ordinary parents, or better yet some victims, to see how that statement would fly. Can't believe he is supposed to be brilliant but blunders so often.
I also fear that if it has not been for people like Thomas Doyle, SNAP leaders, and the exodus from the Catholic Church in Germany and other places, we would have heard little acknowledgement of a problem from the Vatican.
I pray that somehow the Holy Spirit is working in all this to cleanse the Church.
Dear Father Tom, Thank you
Dear Father Tom, Thank you for the wisdom of this piece. May I soften the
matter if only slightly. I am Irish. I went to one of the City's finest
Christian Brother Schools. I was 8 years old. In a class of 52 children I
one day made a very bad mistake. I found myself with no pencil - in those days a capital crime. The large Brother called me forward and had me bend over. I was booted across the floor to the great joy of many of my peers.
Later that day I went home. I told my mother what happened. I immediately
got a beating that would have made the Brother proud. My coccyx hurt for months. Its called clergy worship! Do not mistake my intent here.. I have
known lovely priests to leave, not because they wanted to get married , but
because the felt they had been reduced to being a functionary!
I wound up leaving myself...not because I wanted to. I simply came to believe that a Secular priest, which I would not have become, should be allowed to
marry since canonically he was a Layman. I came to my home parish and went
to see my local Pastor. I spoke of my situation and the studies I had been
and continue to be involved in. His answer was that he had not read a book in thirty years, "Lets have a drink" . My parents and that generation were
complicit in the abuse. You would report it at your own risk!
Just to add an angle not much discussed.
The truth is more complicated.
TomC
Around 1960 or so I was
Around 1960 or so I was serving Easter Midnight Mass. When I came out to the car with my mother picking me up, I told her the 'big news' is that Fr.X was so drunk he almost fell over. To my surprise then and even today, Mom lambasted me for saying such a thing about a priest even though it was true.
So yes, the truth is complicated and lay people may have more of a role in the coverup than we realized.
Post new comment