The Independent News Source
Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
Archbishop Tomasi's indefensible defense
by Tom Roberts on Sep. 29, 2009
Printer-friendly version
Send to friend
PDF version
Printer-friendly versionSend to friendPDF versionPublic relations has never been the Vatican's strong suit, but one would think by now that someone would have sent out the memo advising against defending the church's activity in the sex abuse scandal by pointing the finger at everyone else.
But there was Archbishop Silvano Tomasi, the Vatican's permanent observer to the UN, defending the church's handling of the crisis by citing suspect numbers (only 1.5-5 percent of priests involved), questionable social science (most of the perpetrators were homosexual) and the thin consolation that sex abuse exists not only in the wider culture but in other religions and denominations.
What Archbishop Tomasi has to say about sex abuse might be of little consequence (someone ought to at least brief him on it beyond an article in The Christian Science Monitor before he decides to pronounce on the matter again) except that he's at the United Nations and thus can command a sizeable megaphone. That it is not his role to analyze the subject nor pronounce on it is of little matter. He's an archbishop and he's in an important position, so for too many he becomes the latest official voice of the church on the topic.
That's an unfortunate result because such a nonsensical defense leaves those outside the church muttering to themselves and finding reason to dismiss the church on so many other scores. It also merely stokes the anger of those within the church who know, as apparently the good archbishop does not, that long ago the scandal moved beyond the particulars of who assaulted whom and whether they were true pedophiles, homosexuals, ephebophiles or from some other place on the spectrum of sexual orientation or predilection.
What fuels the seemingly unending anger and discontent is the fact that those in charge -- pastors, bishops, archbishops, cardinals, even Pope John Paul II -- remained deaf to the complaints of the abused and over decades went to great lengths to protect the perpetrators.
Those who understand this story wish that those like Archbishop Tomasi, who are moved to pronounce indignantly on the subject, would first read the documents that have so far been produced. They're available at bishopaccountability.org. Read the Philadelphia Grand Jury report, read the thousands of pages out of Boston, read the documents from the Paracletes warning of the dangers of priests who abuse children, read the long accounts of the Legionaries of Christ founder Fr. Marciel Maciel and the deceptions and fraud that he masterminded over decades as a sexual predator. Such information might demonstrate how preposterous it is to suggest to Catholics that they should somehow be less indignant about the sex abuse crisis within the church because it also occurs elsewhere.
Perhaps the next church authority tempted to pronounce in the same manner might stop for a second and imagine what he would say should a Catholic lay person approach him and suggest that the church not get so upset about such matters as birth control or divorce or abortion because other churches had far less rigid teachings about those subjects.
As a rabbi, commenting on Tomasi's remarks, said: "Comparative tragedy is a dangerous path on which to travel."
Indeed. While the church has taken admirable steps to deal with the symptoms of the crisis -- making training mandatory and doing background checks and the like -- the much deeper issue, the question of how the institution reached the point where it could protect such crimes for so long while ignoring the pleas of victims, is yet to be answered. It is a question that gets at the heart of our community life and the trust that should exist between laity and clergy. It is a question that demands a deep examination of the clerical, especially hierarchical, culture, its sense of privilege and how, in the future, it might be held accountable.
The entire reason I am a
The entire reason I am a lapsed Catholic is the failure of that trust in so many areas, not just the abuse mess. I'll come back when the higher-ups are held accountable. Which is to say, never.
It is unbelievable that the
It is unbelievable that the Holy See is using the likes of an Archbishop Tomasi in playing the homosexual card again. If this is an attempt to rebuild credibility in the church it only succeeds in demonstrating how uninformed the hierarchs are and/or how much they are in denial, still.
God save us from such men.
And trying to squirm out of its responsibility for the untold numbers of sexully abused individuals be they young children, young men, women, vulnerable adults including nuns, by saying the Roman Catholic Church is no worse AND EVEN BETTER THAN other religious denominations is appalling.
Apparently Tomasi has not read the SHADOW REPORT ON THE NON-COMPLIANCE OF THE WORLDWIDE RCC WITH THE UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON THE RIGHTS OF THE CHILD. Below is a recent letter.
Letter to the Editor of the Washington Post
Regarding Rachel Zoll’s article, “Vatican: Gay `behavior’ in seminaries declines,” (01/15/2009):
One hopes that this is not yet another attempt by the hierarchy to blame those in the priesthood with a homosexual orientation for their own failures in adequately handling the widespread problem of sexual abuse in the church whether one confines that problem to the sexual abuse of children specifically or whether one includes younger adults, male or female or other vulnerable persons.
Even the use of such phrases as, “difficulties in the area of morality,” appear to be purposefully misleading.
Rape, sodomy, and molestation are acts peculiar to sexual predators who may be heterosexual or homosexual, celibate or not.
The “scandal” that individuals refer to happened because those members of the hierarchy who were in charge did not do what they should have done when they became aware of sexual abusive clergy whatever their sexual orientation.
The clarity of that fact is well represented in any number of civil or juridical investigations and grand jury reports. The facts show that the church’s own Canon Law in this regard was not observed the way it should have been.
It is sad to have to say that reports from across the country indicate that various kinds of cover up continue to this day. Bishops still refuse to release records even after being so ordered by the courts and they still refuse to make known the names and locations of all known sexual predators in their dioceses.
Recently, in Delaware there have been attempts to seal all proceedings of upcoming trails to keep the public in the dark as to what has happened.
Lawyers representing the Church and religious orders are even attempting to seal previously unsealed records.
This does not speak well to the accountability and transparency the institutional Catholic Church promised in 2002.
Sister Maureen Paul Turlish
Victims’ Advocate
New Castle, Delaware
maureenpaulturlish@yahoo.com
Tomasi is an embarrassment to all of us. He should be an embarrassment to the Holy See as well. Needless to say, he should be recalled to Rome at once.
smpt
Dear Aonymous: I hope you are
Dear Aonymous:
I hope you are just a lapsed Catholic but still joyfully attending the Eucharist around Jesus' table - tha Altar. Jesus personally calls us to share in His Divinity through receiving His Body and Blood. Forget the imperial, monarchical and hierachical church, but stick with the Sacramental Communion with and in Jesus, the Son of God.
say's to Archbishop Tomasi,
say's to Archbishop Tomasi, do you honestly believe what your saying? Do you honestly believe that people are stupid? Have you ever taken the time to review the information on the ,"bishopsaccountability.org? Get real, archbishop Tomasi....
I would love to read the
I would love to read the statement in its entirety, without prejudging it according to the parts of it alluded to by the British Guardian newspaper.
Me too, Ted. But unlike
Me too, Ted. But unlike numerous past interventions of Tomasi easily found on the Vatican's own website, this text seems to have disappeared, leaving us to rely on the Guardian reporter's article:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/sep/28/sex-abuse-religion-vatican
Perhaps a bit more will come to light with an upcoming BBC followup:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/ni/2009/10/the_vatican_hits_back.html
We shall see...
And then there's NPR's take on it as well:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=113377170
You can read the entire
You can read the entire statement at http://www.iheu.org/holy-see-responds-iheu-criticism.
Thanks for the link ... but
Thanks for the link ... but now looking at whose site it is, authentication is still lacking Looks much like formats I've seen from the Church before, but I could create one of those myself ... probably the genuine article but not assuredly. As I read the Bp.'s statement in reply to an accusation from the maintainer of the site, it is clear he was being academic and not thinking about the reaction out of context. His point appeared to be that from the perspective of today's children, it is wholly inadequate to focus the majority of the attention on the Catholic Church as opposed to the wider problem in all sorts of other settings, and the Church has taken steps greatly to reduce the problem within its own ranks.
Turning attention to the past handling of the matters, it is clear the Church screwed up big time. The past is very valuable toward ensuring that those involved in the mismanagement of these matters are properly disciplined and their errors are used to teach a new generation of managers not to be similarly mislead by any theological presumptions or geopolitical considerations. I am myself persuaded that the errors arose from a shortage of instruction in human psychology, a particular bias arising from the theology of ordination, the unfortunate interaction of subsidiarity with Bishops' lack of wisdom, and an over-sensitivity to how cooperation with Western police would play out in the Soviet Bloc when the Church wished not to cooperate there.
I doubt if Vatican sycophant
I doubt if Vatican sycophant and in-house "leche cul" John Allen will have anything cogent to contribute to this discussion.
Yes, Tomasi's remarks
Yes, Tomasi's remarks indicate a very childish attitude toward the situation. Just picture a child getting caught doing something wrong. Then, the child says,"Joe did it too." Once again,someone in the hierarchy makes the Church a laughing stock. I'm beginning to think that much of the hierarchy never fully achieved adulthood.
This is EXACTLY the problem
This is EXACTLY the problem and everytime somebody tries to defend these actions it shows again just how little the laity matters in the eyes of many.
"What fuels the seemingly unending anger and discontent is the fact that those in charge -- pastors, bishops, archbishops, cardinals, even Pope John Paul II -- remained deaf to the complaints of the abused and over decades went to great lengths to protect the perpetrators."
Their own worst problem seems
Their own worst problem seems to be the intensely immature leadership frequently encountered at the top of the Church bureaucracy & various Dioceses around the world. The whole thrust of papal endeavors to concentrate on a knowledge of correct theology (mind-set) while ignoring dubious behavior (shuffling around criminal abusers, etc) is short-sighted folly.
Our Lord had warnings about failing to change the underlying problems, when He said that 7 devils would replace the cast-out 1 devil, if everything else stayed the same.
Tomasi is another mitered
Tomasi is another mitered dunce who thinks all Catholics are stupid.
High Church's officials and
High Church's officials and everyone else should be treated on equal legal terms as simple members amidst the international community. Part of the problem is that national states still allow too much margin of operation and undeserved respect to some inveterate abused Church traditions and abusive personalities. The Church will be revered when She fullfils Her spiritual mission, and should be restrained when She permits abuse to happen and when She covers-up crimes. The final judgement on SINS corresponds to the City of God, all right; but while we are in the City of Man we should apply the Law firmly to every CRIME and to every criminal, bad ministers of the Church, at any level, included. Besides, archbishop Tomasi should be chastised not only for his immoral public expressions (for immoral they are indeed) but also for his awesome mental limitations. What a religious spokesman!
This cleric is used to
This cleric is used to secrecy, incredible secrecy--especially Vatican secrecy. It never changes. It surrounds everything he does. So the abuse is, for him, just a blown secret--somehow it leaked out. And, as always, there's the cover-up. Nixon could have taken lessons from these guys. And then the denials, and as usual the "round up the gays". All totalitarian regimes do this (and let's face it--we've have a totalitarian theology since Pio Nono.)
Mr. Roberts writes: "the much
Mr. Roberts writes: "the much deeper issue, the question of how the institution reached the point where it could protect such crimes for so long while ignoring the pleas of victims, is yet to be answered."
I would like to hazard a guess.
The ambivalent attitude toward homosexuality and other varieties of sexual deviance which exists in culture also entered the Church. As in other institutions, many people deferred to research in the sciences and speculations in ethical philosophy that questioned, and often attempted to disprove, the abnormality of same-sex attraction and of the sexual attraction of adults to children. Once the abnormality of these attractions was believed to have been discredited, the attempts to stop the behaviors associated with these attractions were wrongly considered misguided, futile, or problematic if not 'immoral'. Episcopal authorities were influenced by contemporary theories blurring the boundary between normal and deviant sexuality, and incorporated into their assessment of the situation the personal histories of everyone effected by the 'fruits' of these attractions, and found themselves unable to develop a consistent and forthright response.
This problem has always plagued humankind, but in this particular day and age, squarely onto the shoulders of the Church has been placed the charge to identify, examine, and eradicate (to the extent possible) manifestation of sexual evil and the false teaching that often accompanies it. Throughout history, the Church and her members have been called to the sacrificial task of confronting the personal impact of destructive ideas born (and reborn) in the world, while in the process often bearing terrible pain, suffering, and even martyrdom.
I believe that through the promotion of individual holiness, exemplified profoundly by Saint and Doctor Thérèse of Lisieux, we can overcome the tragedy of sexual abuse.
I presume that Mr. Masotti is
I presume that Mr. Masotti is sincere in his moral analysis of sexuality. But his analysis fails on many grounds. He cites no authorities who justify adult attraction to children. He uses
traditional Vatican language when talking of homosexual attraction such as "deviant" "abnormal". Thus he labels a good percentage of the population as deviant, as abnormal. He uses the term "sexual evil". He asks us to be martyrs in eradicating this evil and other destructive ideas (he doesn't mentions what they are). What could he mean by this? This language, sadly, borders on the fanatic; the language that has, in the past, launched "terrible pain, suffering and even martyrdom."
Regarding authorities who
Regarding authorities who justify adult attraction to children, please see "Endorsement of adult-child sex on rise" http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2002/apr/19/20020419-042059-4124r/?f... Dr. Judith Reisman, http://www.drjudithreisman.com/, currently does valuable investigative research on this topic as well.
Unfortunately there are too many "other destructive ideas" to mention in brief; I was simply trying to convey that the ideas that lead to sexual deviance are among many that the Church is called to prevail against.
I don't think that it's disqualifying for a Catholic to use terms employed by the Magisterium.
Karol Wojtyla, when he was Bishop of Ombi, Poland, published the book “Love & Responsibility”, non-Magisterial to be sure, but one that I consider to be of very great historic importance. I believe that this book can help anyone of good will understand and overcome sexual sin. Were that translations of it from the Polish had been available to the world sooner so that its timely content could have been taught throughout the Church! I'd like to share the following excerpt from the book relevant to our present discussion, where the future Pope writes within a broader examination of the ‘sexual urge’:
“The sexual urge is something even more basic than the psychological and physiological attributes of man and woman in themselves, though it does not manifest itself or function without them. Moreover, the sexual urge in man and woman is not fully defined as an orientation towards psychological and physiological attributes of the other sex as such. These do not and cannot exist in the abstract, but only in a concrete human being, a concrete man and or woman. Inevitably then, the sexual urge in a human being is always in the natural course of things directed towards another human being---this is the normal form which it takes. If it is directed towards the sexual attributes as such, this must be recognized as an impoverishment or even a perversion of the urge. If it is directed towards the sexual attributes of a person of the same sex we speak of a homosexual deviation. Still more emphatically do we speak of sexual deviation if the urge is directed not towards the sexual attributes of a human being but towards those of an animal. The natural direction of the sexual urge is towards a human being of the other sex and not merely towards ‘the other sex’ as such. It is just because it is directed towards a particular human being that the sexual urge can provide the framework within which, and the basis on which, the possibility of loves arises.”
Karol Wojtyla, Love and Responsibility, translated from the 1960 Polish original by H.T. Willetts, William Collins Sons & Co. Ltd (London) and Farrar, Straus and Giroux, Inc. (New York), 1981, page 49.
Thank you for the opportunity to respond.
May God bless you!
Matthew C. Masotti
Karol Wojtyla; "Love and
Karol Wojtyla; "Love and Responsibility", a celibate erstwhile bishop of Poland...exactly the person I would entrust my urges to. Another example of the distance between clergy, hierarchy, and magisterium of Rome from reality. It takes considerable wanton hubris to cite as an authority on sexual urges one who has spent the entirety of his existence fleeing from it...
One who has impelled the clergy to do likewise. If anyone is listening and reading such silliness it is only because of a dire need for a chuckle.
You should read "Love and
You should read "Love and Responsibility". In the book you'll learn that there's more to sexual urges than simply acting on them.
All the best
With all due respect to the
With all due respect to the late Pontiff, I think the question of the "sexual urge" is best left to psychologists to explain. The Pontiffs should stick to morality. I for one accept the Church's moral teaching on sexuality but I don't buy what JPII is saying in that paragraph above. The Church has no competence in psychology per se. He "seems" to be denying general sexual orientations which clearly exist in the view of most psycholgists. Furthermore, it is most probable that sexuality exists along a continuum from strongly heterosexual to strongly homosexual.
I think though to be fair, he is talking about the ideal way the sexual urge should work (directed towards a particular person of the opposite sex - adult, age appropriate). But idealism & sexuality don't go together, no way! If they did, there would be a whole lot more real monogamy in the world! The sexual instinct is disordered in all human beings; it's called concupiscence. Humans are a fallen race due to Original Sin. Nobody can throw any stones when it comes to the orientations of sexuality!
The big wrong here is that
The big wrong here is that the Church condemns homosexual acts as divient. The Church is staffed with a majority of homosexual priests and bishops. they are what they condemn. Is it any wonder that stupid pronoucements come from such people with that kind of mind set? And we straight laity keep on attending their prayer gatherings as if nothing is amiss....
"The Church is staffed with a
"The Church is staffed with a majority of homosexual priests and bishops."
That's a slanderous, though forgivable, remark.
I was part of what would be
I was part of what would be refered to as "staff" and I can tell you that many, many of those who are staffing The Church are, indeed, homosexual. I do not find this slanderous, simple a willingness to be honest. Therefore I don't understand why it is a remark that would require forgivness. Have you ever been open to considering that what was stated might be a true statement?
Dear Matthew C.
Dear Matthew C. Masotti,
Please see Richard Sipe's web site.
http://www.richardsipe.com/
He thoroughly documents a large number of both gay and sexually active Bishops.
He also states,
"Cardinal Jose Sanchez, at the time secretary for the Vatican Congregation
for the Clergy, did not hesitate to say, “I have no reason to doubt the
accuracy of those figures” when he was presented with studies that claimed
that at any one time between 45 and 50 percent of clergy are not practicing
celibacy.4
For the moment, let?s suspend judgment or arguments about numbers or
sources of information, accuracy or validation of The List5 and bishops? sex.
One does not have to depend on that document to say responsibly that, yes,
some U. S. bishops are gay and unfortunately some have been reported to be
sexually active even with minors.6 Clerical sex activity presents complicated
conundrums; we cannot deal with all of them at once. The pretense that
celibate practice/observance is universal or even the most common state of
affairs among the Roman Catholic clergy—including the hierarchy—is a
deception of the highest order. This intentional hypocrisy is a travesty and
perpetuates a destructive illusion that distorts all of Christian life.7 "
The numbers indicate his sources and you can look those up at the web site.
May we have Peace and less Episcopal hypocrisy,
R. Dennis Porch, MD
Get and read "The Sexual
Get and read "The Sexual Person" by Todd A. Salzman and Michael G. Lawler (2008), partularly chapter 7.
Or, are you one of those "my mind is made up, don't confuse me with facts and research" kind of Catholics?
After perusing the first 11
After perusing the first 11 pages of Salzman and Lawler’s "The Sexual Person"---freely viewable at Amazon Books---I don’t see how a faithful Catholic can condone what is essentially an apology for the destruction of marriage and an attempt to redefine sexual ethics. By means of Marxist anthropological historicism the authors seem ready to espouse a treatise that justifies current sexual deviance, because, for example, the ancients did it, and the medieval theologians didn’t understand why the Greeks couldn’t help it. This book seems to be a polemic advancing moral relativism in the strongest manner. It's worth reading only if you're interested in eventually taking on the noble and pastoral task of trying to correct the authors, point-by-point, for the sake of saving their and their readers souls.
Lastly, I must share the following, a verbatim quote from page 8 of the book:
“In reality, of course, the Magisterium is more than a little schizophrenic when it speaks of making moral judgments.”
Schizophrenic? They spoke of Jesus Christ in a similar way (see Mark 3:21 or John 10:20).
But that's OK, He and His Mystical Body can take it.
God bless you!
I don't think anyone really
I don't think anyone really questions the abnormality of adult to child sexual attraction. It is illegal after all. Adult to teenager sexual attraction is less deviant but still deviant and harmful to adolescents in numerous ways. It is illegal as well. Those are the legal groundrules at least in the USA. This is the starting point.
No excuses can be made for the bishops not treating this issue as truly serious as it is. How can anyone get to be a bishop without understanding the full range of sexual issues and their legal ramifications? There is no defense for the way this problem was handled by the bishops. Even in the 50s bishops knew that adults with this problem towards youth could not be cured. In 1961 the Vatican had a policy of nonadmittance to the priesthood for those with homosexual, ephebophile & pedophile inclinations. Then came the "glorious" Council and the Church went to hell & a handbucket! According to Paul VI, the smoke of Satan entered the Church after the Council. The sexual abuse crisis is directly related to the "Spirit of the Council."
I do not play down some of
I do not play down some of the horrible situations that have come to light over the pass 10 years and the pain of many of the victims of clergy sexual abuse. Yet, I also feel that there is more here that may, at first glance, seem apparent. I can't help but think that if The Church is going to do all that it can to make it anywhere from very difficult to impossible for the homosexual person to intergrate his/her sexuality, then they should not be suprise that gay and lesbian people have been involved in unhealthy expressions of their sexuality or have more difficulity intergrating into society. There cannot be laws and attitudes that marginalize people then point a finger at these very people and say "look how marginalize they are", as if it is something intrinstic to there condition.
Unfortunately, the damage that has resulted from the Vatican's position on this issue has injured many people, many of them good people who found themsleves with a sex drive, but no guidence or structures to express that drive in a healthy way. Not all are called to a celabite life and if one is not called to that life, but feels obliged to live it none-the-less, there can be serious consequences, consequences which The Church seems comfortable in ignoring, yet has paid a high price. The Church's guidlines for pastoral consoling for the homosexual person is frightening in its lack of understanding of the cost to the homosexual - often the spiritual cost - of a life of secercy and oppression.
I pray the the leaders of The Church will become open to the wonderful witness of many openly homosexual people and how beautifully the Holy Spirit is working in their lives.
The good Archbishop seems to
The good Archbishop seems to have missed the pint - who cares if the cleric was homosexual or straight. What we care about is the fact that children were exploited by clergy, and the hierarchy covered up in multitudinous ways. The seual orientation is of no consequence unless the good Archbishop is pretending that gay clerics do not exist. The logic of his argument and his pointing of the finger to others leaves me dumbfounded. No wonder it is so hard to be Catholic today!
"The much deeper issue, the
"The much deeper issue, the question of how the institution reached the point where it could protect such crimes for so long while ignoring the pleas of victims, is yet to be answered."
I believe that the answer lies in Lord Acton's statement: "Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely!" That is why nearly 2000 yrs. before Lord Acton, Jesus Christ spoke so disparagingly about the sort of institution that the Roman Catholic Church has become. The current institutional Roman Catholic Church is not a group that Jesus would recognize. He only knows the People of God---------let us hope that someday the Catholic hierarchy will be converted to join them.
On 22 September, speaking in
On 22 September, speaking in the plenary of the UN Human Rights Council, the International Humanist and Ethical Union (IHEU), representing more that 100 humanist, secular and free-thought organisations in over 40 countries, criticised the Holy See over its role in covering up the scale of child abuse by its priests and religious orders, and for failing to honour its obligations under international law. The statement was based on a longer written statement submitted to the Council in August and published by the UN on 8 September (http://www.iheu.org/un-publishes-iheu-statement-child-abuse-and- holy-see).
The IHEU statement addressed specifically the role of the Holy See - which claims responsibility for the Catholic Church worldwide - in attempting to cover up the extent of child abuse perpetrated by its priests and religious orders. In exercising their right of reply to this criticism the representative of the Holy See ignored the main criticism contained in our statement.
The reply made on behalf of the Papal Nuncio Archbishop Thomasi argued that the Catholic Church was not unique in having clergy who sexually abused children and young people, but it made no mention of the physical and mental abuse meted out for generations to children under the care of its religious orders. No doubt there are abusers in all walks of life, but our point was not the abuse itself but the cover up in which some of the highest officials of the Church were implicated.
The Holy See is a sovereign state and its senior clergy, safely ensconced in the Vatican out of reach of civil law, are answerable to no earthly power other than themselves - and to the few international treaties to which they are party. One such is the International Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) and, as shown in the IHEU report, the Holy See is in massive breach of its obligations under that convention.
Commenting on the Holy See’s response, IHEU Main Representative in Geneva, Roy Brown, said: “By failing to address this issue while seeking to point the finger of blame elsewhere, the Holy See’ has scored a spectacular own goal. One senior UN official described their reply as ‘a disgrace’. We agree.”
And Dioceses have or are
And Dioceses have or are going to implement "Coming Back Home" programs. Who in there right mind would want to come back home to a dysfunctional, power controlling and abusive institution?
While I agree that the sex
While I agree that the sex abuse crisis is indefensible from start to finish to include the ridiculous Dallas Charter which exempted the bishops, I feel that it needs to be seen in some perspective. People are all too willing to attack the Catholic Church at the drop of a hat. All priests are caught up in unjust suspicion. The Cardinal is right in one point at least. The abuse crisis was predominately ephebophelia of a homosexual nature. I've studied the statistics and they contain some very disturbing facts such as 1/3 of the claims are against dead priests. The bottom line is that yes, the Church deserves a black eye on this one but she does not deserve two black eyes and then some as the media attacks have suggested!
It is very tempting and
It is very tempting and facile to play the 'anti-Catholic' card in order to account for all of the adverse publicity.
The reality is that the press is no more 'anti-Catholic' than they are 'anti-Criminal' or 'anti-plane-crash' or (perhaps more aptly) 'anti-train-wreck.'
Like it or not, news of priests and religious using their positions of power and authority to sexually exploit children and vulnerable adults is news, and newsworty.
Were the Church anything like irreproachable on this matter, then the so-called "attacks" would have no basis.
All priests are caught up in unjust suspicion.
On the contrary. ALL priests have been through a formation process which not only tolerated but in many cases exacerbated psychosexual immaturity. The formation process and the clerical culture furthermore fostered clericalismm, together with a sense that acting to halt the excesses of fellow priests by involving civil authorities was an act of disloyalty to one's profession or of giving scandal to the Church. As a result, for every abusive priest or religious there are probably several others who could have acted to prevent further outrages. These individuals failed to do so.
Therefore, they are collectively and individually the agents of any suspicions that may be cast upon them.
The Cardinal is right in one point at least. The abuse crisis was predominately ephebophelia of a homosexual nature.
Even if this is the case, and due to issues of reporting and of distribution of victims it isn't clear that it is, why should it matter? Should an adolescent of 14 years of age enjoy any less protection from being introduced to hetero- or homosexual sex by a middle-aged parish priest than an eight-year-old? For that matter, is a 30-year-old adult at a vulnerable point in his or her life any less entitled not to be sexually exploited when seeking out "pastoral counseling?"
I've studied the statistics and they contain some very disturbing facts such as 1/3 of the claims are against dead priests.
Again, why should this be surprising? By definition, most of the victims were younger, perhaps decades younger, than their victimizers. Therefore by the actuarial tables, the latter would be expected to die first. Add to that the reality that much reporting has been delayed, often as a direct result of actions taken contemporarily by the abuser or by the Church, and this should not be at all surprising. Only in the last 7 years has it become "okay to tell" as regards these crimes. To imply that the fact of the demise of the abuser makes the victims any less truthful is cynical and in fact "re-victimizes" the survivors. We owe it to these courageous people to treat them as though they are fundamentally truthful people who would not go through the cathartic pain of reporting if their motivations were for any reason but the greatest good.
The bottom line is that yes, the Church deserves a black eye on this one but she does not deserve two black eyes and then some as the media attacks have suggested!
On the contrary--- the good Cardinal's diatribe is proof positive that the Church requires a "second black eye" because after all of the revelations of the past decade, they still don't "get it." The are still attempting to defend the indefinsible and still attempting to rationalize and to divert the attention from their own culpability. They are still endeavoring to "put it behind us" without the three key ingredients to both divine and earthly forgiveness:
Honesty, contrition and amends.
You deserve a black eye
You deserve a black eye yourself! You're quite typical of the hatemongers of the Catholic Church. Make the Church look as bad as possible!
Do you believe the women in South Carolina who has named names about the 7 priests who raped her at a black Mass to the Devil at which incidentally infants were sacrificed? One of the perps was none other than Archbishop Bernardin! Because a "survivor" makes this claim it must be true acording to anti-Catholics like yourself! Baloney!
There are plenty of sick, drug addicted and dysfunctional people making false claims against priests and other people. There is a whole other side to this abuse crisis which rarely gets into the media. And I say again, fully 1/3 of the claims are against dead priests who cannot defend themselves.
This is still America and you can't bring a civil case against a dead person into a court of law. But still, stupid bishops will throw money at these people. Some of them use the money to buy drugs like one of the accusers up in Boston. He died a week after his settlement from a drug overdose!
The so called victims are lucky they don't have to deal with paulte. I would force every single one of them to take a polygraph and file a counter suit of slander against all that failed the polygraph. In all these settlements has one single so called victim been required to take a polygraph?
My question is: why has the
My question is: why has the National Catholic Reporter not assigned an "expert" or series of guest experts in the clergy abuse scandal to write weekly or even monthly columns on the topic? The clergy abuse crisis has largely been relegated to the "news around the world" type clips that merely report rather than comment on the topic. Archbishop Tomasi is symptomatic of, not an exception to, the ongoing uninformed, harmful commentary of the Vatican toward the clergy abuse scandal. Tomasi speaks for a lot of people, including those Catholics in America who blame homosexuals (unfairly and wrongly) for the scandal, when they should be blaming and holding accountable a clerical culture that is as dysfunctional a system as there is in the world. But I also blame the Catholic media, like Commonweal, America, and yes, the National Catholic Reporter, for behaving like most Catholics who believe the scandal is over. As one who works with over 1,000 survivors and who gets 1-4 new cases of clergy sexual abuse per week, I can say with authority: the scandal is still in its early stages. Just ask the Canadians in Antigonish, Nova Scotia! Were funds from the "faithful" used to purchase Bishop Lahey's pornography? They can count on it! So why do the faithful keep funding this beast? It might be the $64,000.00 question! If only each clergy abuse victim had $64,000.00 to stay alive!
Rev. Robert M. Hoatson
Founder and President
Road to Recovery, Inc.
Livingston, New Jersey
Thank you for your insights
Thank you for your insights and for the work that you do, Rev. Hoatson. I agree with you and with the Dominican priest and another advocate in this issue, Rev. Tom Doyle. For years now, he has said the best and most efficient way of ending this "clerical culture in a dysfunctional system" is to end all financial support to the Catholic Church. I give the money now to different reputable charities who help those in need. The Catholic Church, as it is now structured, is unable to rehabilitate itself thus it is immoral for us to continue to enable it with our financial support.
As a victim of physical and
As a victim of physical and sexual abuse at the hands of nuns and a few priests in grade school and high school and an attempted rape at the hands of a local parish priest while attending Mt. St. Mary's Catholic Men's College in Emmitsburg, MD, I speak from personal experience.
This problem has very little to do with sex.
This is about privilege. And power. And a sociopathic mindset within Catholic clergy (to include nuns and brothers) that sees parishioners, especially children, as property. This is essentially a Middle Ages institutional world view among people who live a lifestyle little changed from the Middle Ages and foisted upon the serfs, the peasants, (i.e.) the parishioners and their children.
This is a study in dysfunctional management. This is an organizational development problem, a leadership and training problem inside of an institution that models itself on organizational behaviors that originated approximately 1,ooo A.D.
This really has little to do with individuals seeing themselves as possessing the right to rape children or adolescents. What this is really about is a clerical class seeing themselves as having the right to do anything, ANYTHING, they wish to do with the serfs (that would be us).
What this really is, is a pre-medieval/medieval mindset brought forward into the empirical era of human history. This is about an institutional management style whose time has come...and gone...over seven hundred years ago.
This about serfs (i.e. parishioners) being bound to the land (i.e. remaining faithful to the church and her dogmas) and therefore being open to clergy for abuse in the mind of the clergy. And judging from the typical attitude of the pew Catholic, the typical Catholic appears to have no problem with this odd arrangement.
This about the clerical class taking their privileges with the barely human among them (again, that would be us).
Sex is just a side issue in this whole sordid affair. This is really about the lords taking privileges with those below their station.
The church heirarchy is an
The church heirarchy is an incestious organization in that the reigning pope appoints the cardinals who will eventually elect his successor. As a matter of human nature, he appoints those who reflects his views. They then always appoint one of their own to succeed the pope when he dies thus assuring that the organization continues in the same path it has followed for eons.
If new thinking somehow is introduced in the form of a "radical" cardinal he is a rare minority and will not advance further. New thinking is stiffled. The old ways are insured and genetically malformed.
Most "governmental" organizations that survive for any length of time are periodically cleansed thru elections or, in the case of dictatorships, revolutions. The "catholic way" insures that this does not happen so it continues to mutate.
If you are waiting for renewal in the church, don't hold your breath or you will pass out or die first.
Comments like these made by
Comments like these made by Archbishop Tomasi only add to the problem. Yes these things happen elsewhere. But as has been noted his data is suspect. Is this the same man who has a PhD. in Sociology and did some wonderful work on migration studies for his Scalabrini community? If so, he should know the need for objective data.
The main problem is the coverup. Yes many superiors and bishops did the best they thought they could in the"old" days before more recent data was known - around 1988. However some bishops, certainly "Cardinal" Law showed a criminal irresponsibility and inability to change right up to 2002. He, and his henchmen auxiliary bishops directly lied to concerned parents who pleaded for him to stop priests from abusing more children.
Even before the 80's didn't bishops ever think something was out of joint. Father can't marry a woman, if he attempts to do so he is immediately excommunicated, but if he has sex with a 10 year old altar boy or his five year old niece, well we will get him some help - and send him to the next parish. Even without a full understanding of pedophilia that wasnsn't availible at that time didn't something seem wrong with this picture. Did any of these bishops have trouble sleeping at night?
The hierarchy had such an exaulted view of priesthood that it, and their own hides, had to be protected at all costs. Law and his criminal accomplices should all have been sent to jail. Many other bishops didn't do enough, but did much better than him. The churches support for their imprisionment would have resorded people's faith in the institutional church and sent a needed message to the climers in the church.
What is this Vatican Hack
What is this Vatican Hack trying to say? Their perverts are just as rotten as our perverts".
Someone has probably already
Someone has probably already said this in the comments, but it's bishopaccountability.org not .com.
Gratitude to Tom Roberts for
Gratitude to Tom Roberts for this excellent post. Thanks to NCR for being the only reliable Catholic outlet about clerical sexual abuse.
Roberts wrote: "What fuels the seemingly unending anger and discontent is the fact that those in charge...remained deaf to the complaints of the abused and over decades went to great lengths to protect the perpetrators."
For examples of the lies, evasions, denials and cover-ups, unacknowledged as such to this day, see the contrast between what the bishop says versus the what the attorney general found in NH at
http://votf.org/Survivor_Support/truth_list.html
Snippet -
Question: “Have you lied in the conduct of your office?”
Auxiliary Bishop Francis Christian: “I have not.”
Attorney General's report: “Following Fortier’s conviction (for rape) in 1998, a probation and parole officer invited the Diocese to provide background about Father Fortier for purposes of his pre-sentence investigation of Fortier. Despite Bishop Christian’s knowledge of Fortier’s conduct in 1984 (sexual assault of a minor, watching pornography and providing alcohol to minors), Bishop Christian reported in a 1998 letter to the probation and parole officer that Fortier’s “sexual problems with youth were unknown to the Diocese”
Bishop Christian's definition of a lie must be breathtaking.
Tom Roberts continues..."It is a question that demands a deep examination of the clerical, especially hierarchical, culture, its sense of privilege and how, in the future, it might be held accountable."
As for accountability, the USCCB audits are really a sham compared to truly independent audits by an attorney general. See an earlier comparison between what the bishops found vs what the AG found:
http://votf.org/Survivor_Support/audit.html
These matters are left hanging, wounds that do not heal in face of a "structural wall of mendacity" by priests, bishops and cardinals, in the words of Jason Berry, longtime NCR investigative reporter.
http://www.natcath.com/NCR_Online/archives2/2004d/101504/101504p.php
The beat goes on...
Bridgeport CT's Bishop Lori is still trying to hide the truth. Did the US Supreme Court decide (by Sept. 29 when expected) on releasing documents there?
Archbishop Tomasi does not
Archbishop Tomasi does not mention a revealing fact in his jejune defense of the Church in the sexual abuse scandal. Unlike their secular and other denominational counterparts, priests of the Roman Catholic Church are said to be acting in persona Christi. In fact, the Church teaches that this is both a privilege and a right that comes with ordination to the priesthood, and with that privilege and right comes the grace to act in such a manner. In view of the sexual abuse scandal, the Archbishop's comments reveal a serious disconnect between what the church teaches about the priesthood, acting in persona Christi, and indeed even grace itself. The sexual abuse of children by priests and bishops and its cover-up simply does not square with that teaching, no matter who else in the world is sexually abusing others. That very disconnect is the basis of why this tragedy has not only harmed particular individuals, but has also seriously undermined if not eliminated the church's very moral authority. That wound ultimately is what must be healed--withing the Church, not society at large. And from the looks of it, we have not even begun the process. Thus there is absolutely no defense of the Church to be had at this point. Cardinal Law--we are waiting for you!!!
Post new comment