Sociologist compares today's crisis to Nazi smear campaign

John Allen jnr.
You appear to be hunting hounds and running with the foxes which ever way it goes.
It also reminds me of a comment by some prelate blaming the Jews for attacking the Church.
Things must be very bad for the Church indeed for this manner of propaganda to rear it's ugly head and worse be given credence.
As a man and a journalist say it as it is.
We as members of this Universal Church, have as spiritual guides men who have destroyed thousands of lives are cowards left wanting and your are afraid of getting a little blood on your hands for the sake of expediency.
I don't know much about the reporting profession but I can certainly tell back peddling when I see it.
I thought you would be above that.
Good luck to you and may your plate be ever full whatever be the consequences.

Who does Introvigne think is the new Goebbels who is orchestrating this new campaign to discredit the church? Is he equating the New York Times and other major media or the presnt German, Irish and French governments with the Nazis? If so, he totally fails to prove his case. But one thing he does prove: the clerical abuse of children and the coverup thereof has been going on for a very long time, long before Vatican II allegedly ushered in a period of moral laxity.

And NCR is giving publicity to someone playing the 'Hitler card' because?

Does Mr. Allen have nothing of his own to say, today, so he re-publishes this kind of idiocy?

The only "conspiracy" here was that of the bishops against abuse survivors.

Quite interesting. The comparison of the Nazi regime campaign is specious. There is a vast difference between a centrally organized and managed campaign with a purpose other than the specific of complaint and the very disaggregated and universal emergence of cases which leads to a groundswell of concern (sort of like the difference between rote imposition of data and true insight).

What I find particularly interesting here is that even in the 1930's the fact of clerical abuse of children was deemed to be held with such approbium that it could be the issue around which the regime judged it possible to create a "moral panic" generalized against the church. This puts the lie to those who defend the blase and inappropriate response of hierarchy based on the premise that "things were different then".

One might also note that the potential for scandal would have been a clear warning to the hierarchy that universal action to eliminate, rather than hide, abuse was warranted

"...more outrage than actual cases?"
Could it be that the victims and their families stayed silent?

History is always illuminating and we are in Professor Introvigne's debt for bringing our attention to this sordid episode. The same cannot be said for l'Avvenire's canard. To tie the sad stories in today's press (excluding the hyperbolic antics of a few "big names")to the Nazi smear campaign one has to point to one or more international anti-Catholic conspirators who exercise the same powers that Goebbels exercised in the Third Reich. Hooey! Irrelevant Rubbish! NPC

Interesting history! In my mind the major difference between then and now is
the wide-spread hatred of all things Catholic via the savagery of the unbiquitous media. Why this hatred? Because the Church has been the largest source of counter-culturism.e.g. anti-abortion,homosexuality,same-sex marriages,etc. It would appear the two cultures, the culture of death and the culture of life are on a collsion course. Those of us who believe in the resurrection of Jesus Christ already know how this his-story ends!! Allelulia!!

I find the insinuation that the current global clerical sexual abuse crisis made by this sociologist is similar to the Nazi propaganda against the Catholic Church in 1937 is an insult to every victim who was sexually abused by any priest or member of a religious organization. I find it unconscienable to make such a comparison. I hope that the Pope refutes this claim.

Very interesting parallels of one group needing to get the Church out of the picture to advance its agenda vs the groups today that need the Church out of the way to advance their agenda. I will pray for you as you will no doubt be slandered by most comments on here. Keep up your courage in being the only person on the staff of this rag with an objective voice.

From "petty gossip" to MORAL PANIC. Well, according to this interpretation, it would appear that the Vatican is starting to get the message and circling some higher class cognitive WAGONS, having realized the futility of relying on loose cannon cardinals to fire at will - when they're not accepting envelopes of payola behind the scenes, that is. But let's face it, DAMAGE CONTROL is damage control is damage control! And all the Ph.D's and FOOTNOTES in the world won't change the facts: THOUSANDS of PRIESTS and NUNS abused tens of thousands of CHILDREN, and HUNDREDS of BISHOPS, CARDINALS and yes, even a few POPES covered it up and protected them for the so-called "good of the universal church!!". NO MEDIA organisation in the WORLD has emulated NAZI SMEAR tactics in bringing these facts and the rightful criticism they have engendered to the light of day. Maureen Dowd is NO Joseph Goebbels! Any attempt to paint the NEWS in this light is not only ignorant and gravely unjust to the children who were molested, but SYMPTOMATIC PROOF that the Vatican will stoop to any level to maintain and justify its infrastructure.

Memo to Introvigne:
From a strictly methodological point of view, comparative HISTORY is not SOCIOLOGY - especially when the two histories one is comparing have been penned with an agenda to exonerate the Vatican.

Memo to Allen:
Apparently that ROUND-TRIP ticket on the papal Maltese Falcon cost not one, but TWO articles deflecting the continuing media scrutiny of the Pope. First, in the Spectator, (http://www.spectator.co.uk/spectator/5911953/dont-be-daft-you-cant-put-t...) and now this one.

"In a nutshell, the suggestion – never made explicit, but clear nonetheless – is that today’s drumbeat of criticism of the church over “pedophile priests” amounts to a replay of a Nazi smear campaign."

Nota Bene:
LITERARY INTERPRETATION is NOT journalism. One could just as easily read this article (without relying on translation) and come to a very different understanding, such as 1) this is more historical documentation of the type of clerical pedophilia that inspired and warranted the 1962 now infamous CRIMEN SOLICITATIONIS; http://www.september12009.com/index.php?id=219 and 2) George Santayana was right when he wrote that "THOSE WHO cannot learn from history ARE DOOMED TO REPEAT it..." AND REPEAT it AND REPEAT it!
Take care, Mr. Allen, lest your content begin to resemble the hastily cobbled "scoops" we are more accustomed to reading from the American Papist.

BREAK THE CYCLE!
REVERSE THE REVERSAL!

The text of the translation is not clear on one point -- the Italian original seems equally ambiguous.

"Virtually all of them ended up in extermination camps, where many died." Is that "virtually all" and "many" of the 325 accused or of the 21 condemned?

Otherwise this is very interesting. But unless one is prone to conspiracy theories there is at least one difference: the Nazi campaign was clearly centrally planned and managed. I doubt that anything quite like that is happening now.

The article assumes that the current crisis is about pedophile priests. It is not. It is about the cover-up by bishops and the Vatican. Here in Ontario, for example, a pedophile priest, whose behaviour was known to 4 archbishops and 2 bishops at least, was shipped to Rome where, although the Vatican was told of his activities, he was given a job and made a monsignor. While today criminal Cardinals Law and Levada a sheletered in Rome.
Goebbels (my least-favourite Nazi who poisoned his six children & ensured the suicide of his wife) must be gnashing his teeth with frustration at missing such an opportunity.

A very interesting article. I found it interesting that all of these cases, which a=occured decades ago, and which have been on the public record for quite some time, are suddenly on the front page just in time for Holy Week, when the world's gaze shofts to Rome.

Thanks Mr. Allen for this article. I'm not positive what you intended to convey but here's my take. The essay by this Italian sociologist of religion is the third time within a very short time I've read explicit references to Nazism, journalists and the global scandal surrounding bishops and the sex abuse situation: one made by a curial official, one by the Pope himself, and now in the translated essay by a prominent Italian sociologist of religion.le.

In my view two very important points appeared, the first by you: the Italian expert conveyed a "suggestion - never made explicitly - but clear nonetheless - that today's drumbeat of criticism of the church ... amounts to a replay of a Nazi smear campaign." The second important point came toward the end of the translated essay. Professor Introvigne stated that the Jesuit, Mariaux "proved it (a smear campaign) by publishing highly detailed instructions sent by Goebbels to the Gestapo... and above all to the journalists .... in order to discredit the Church." The word "proved" is an all-important concept.

Radical differences lie in the use of the practice of the guilt-by-association and uncovering "proving" of real truth. To another NCR article I asked the question: is there a pattern in the repetitive allusion to Nazism when referencing negative criticism of bishops who refuse to admit cover-up and other offensive moves in the global scandal? I raise this question again? Why, all of a sudden, is there a spate of this kind of language? I think of the use of Offense as Defense in recent years. Smear the people you opine are smearing you? Do unto others what you feel they're doing unto you? Has the People of God sunk to this depth?

Comparing the revelations of the victims of clerical sexual abusers to Nazi smear campaigns against Jews, Gypsys, Slavs, intellectuals, homosexuals, mentally & physically handicapped persons,etc, is ridiculous in confusing victims with perpetrators.

It is a stupid & unnecessary insult to all the victims of both abusers -- Catholic clergy and Nazi demogogues alike...

Very interesting. I don't see it as an attempt to lesson the scale of the scandal, an impossible thing to do anyway. But moral panic exists and it should be studied.

Apologies in advance for directing you to another Hitler parody. But the article did remind me of it.

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xcy3d9_adolf-hitler-reacts-to-pope-abus...

Eerie and similar tactics, if not the same perpetrators, are described despite all the anti-Catholic nay-saying and groaning comments here. I'm sure the Nazis raged the same way when their fascist bias against the Catholic Church was exposed and challenged. Blessings!

Kudos to Allen for having the courage to run an article like this. He must have known that his readership was the ideological torch and pitchfork type that has so quickly gathered around his house in the form of these comments.

I wonder if these posters would be willing to admit that *BOTH* acknowledgement and remorse for the sins of the hierarchy, *AND* defense against the ideologically-motivated attacks in the form of distortion and even outright lies by the New York Times et al.,

are

simultaneously

tenable.

But an ideologue cannot tolerate what he does not comprehend.

First of all, let me thank Mr. Allen for continuing to simply report. I feel all sides of this very important time in the history of the People of God must quit trying to beat down their opponents, to silence other arguments. As we silence the alternate voices around us, from whatever perspective, we lose the harmonies of the Holy Spirit leading us on. Adults in faith can read this article for what it is.

As for Introvigne's idea that the abuse crisis news reminds him of the Nazi smear campaign, I agree. I see the Vatican trying desperately to manage the news. I see some faithful people tricked because they've believed what they've been taught, much as intelligent Biblical fundamentalists refuse to consider the science against strict Creationism. They'd rather stretch their brains around any story that allows their faith to avoid the test.

However, in 1937, some were taken in but most (led by the Spirit and strong in faith) were not. In 1937, the Nazis spread the lie and the Church was upheld by the faithful especially three laymen and a priest according to the story. How have we come to today, where the Vatican spreads the lie, calling for Penance instead of repenting themselves. Remaining with such a needy and faithless Church is indeed difficult.

The Nazis were a collection of Atheists and Pagans dedicated to wiping out Judeo-Christianity. The Jews were the first target to be followed by Catholics and finally Protestants and Orthodox. Whilst of course the Church hierarchy has to take more responsibility and clean up the Church, much of the press has consistently misquoted the Pope and twisted his words. If you don't realize that there is an anti-Christian bias in Hollywood and the media then you should open your eyes.

I am Catholic not because of the Pope or priests or bishops. I am Catholic because of Jesus. He and therefore Catholicism and the rest of Christianity condemn child abuse. If the Church hierarchy aren't living up to that then they aren't practicing Catholicism.

Where is the outrage at Hollywood's support for the fugitive child-rapist Roman Polanski? Hundreds of actors and movie directors have signed a letter in support of Polanski calling for him to escape justice for drugging and then raping a 13 year old girl.

http://community.livejournal.com/ohnotheydidnt/39618660.html

The hypocrisy stinks.

Don't forget non-religious public school teachers with their moving child abusing teachers around and covering abuse up.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_harassment_in_education

Gay rights campaigner Peter Tatchell led a demonstration against Catholics going to mass at Westminster Cathedral on Sunday 28 March 2010. Yet Peter Tatchell currently campaigns for the age of consent to be lowered to 14 years old. He has posted stories on his website of boys demanding the "right" to have gay sex with older men. He claims these would be consensual, but what about manipulation and child grooming? Tatchell and others were already anti-Catholic long before these scandals because they oppose the Church's teaching on sex and marriage. And the inflammatory rhetoric of people like Dawkins and Hitchens is similar to that of Nazi sympathizers before they took power.

Wow! I usually hate the National Catholic Reporter and don't bother reading it unless it pops up on Pewsitter, but this was really good work. Mr. Allen, kudos from an ex-journalist! That is really good digging! I knew some of this stuff from living there (Germany)for three years, but I learned a great deal more from this article and hope to find out even more as I study the Nazis and their smear campaign against the Church. The more things change, the more they stay the same! Seems that we're a threat to the socialist agenda again. Thanks again for an intelligent defense of the Church. I'll pass it along.

"The expression “moral panic” was only coined by sociologists in the 1970s to identify a social alarm created as a kind of art, accomplished by amplifying real facts and exaggerating their numbers through statistical folklore, as well as “discovering” and presenting as “new” events which in reality are already known and which date to the past. There are real events at the base of the panic, but their number is systematically distorted."

## If these events "in reality are already known and...date to the past" - why was nothing done about them ? Try telling that to the thousands of Irish children & adolescents whose lives & faith have been spat on and crucified & destroyed by the authorities in the Church.

Each response from, or on behalf of, the Vatican,the institutional Church, or the Pope, merely raises further questions. For the Love of God (& I mean exactly that), stop digging the hole the Vatican is in ever deeper & deeper.

There are no excuses for what has been done; each excuse makes the person or persons offering it look more and more morally and theologically & Christianly bankrupt.

If the official Church did not insist on behaving in so unrighteous a fashion - how many of those now protesting against its behaviour and its sinful structures would there be ?

Many people posting here are clearly angered by the way in which the translated article -- or the history discussed (accurately or not) by the article -- invites (without actually making) the suggestion that the current news stories are in some way designed to "smear" the Church, the same way the Nazis tried to smear the Church. Certainly it's in poor taste (perhaps worse) for an official Catholic publication such as "L’Avvenire" to publish an article like this at this time -- however, I think that complicating the anger expressed in many of the posts here is the fact that this bit of history does... it's hard to put it into words, but it just makes things "interesting." From a purely "academic" viewpoint, I just wonder if there's some deep anxiety (justified or not justified) in various societies' consciousnesses about "the Catholic Church," priests, celibacy, sex abuse, etc. -- an anxiety which isn't really there when we're talking about public schools and sex abuse, or whatever.

I put quotation marks around "the Catholic Church" in my last sentence for a reason, and that was to note the way that many who are less connected or involved with the Catholic tradition will speak about the Church (notice that as a Catholic, I tend not to say "the Catholic Church" in a context like that, but just "the Church). Many will often speak of the Church as a monolithic institution: if some bishop criticizes this or that, suddenly it becomes, "the Catholic Church condemned XYZ" (notice that it becomes "condemn"). I know I'm just sort of thinking out loud here a bit; sorry. Anyway, I think that for many, "the Catholic Church" is this sort of "other," something foreign and alien. I wonder how this way of perceiving the Church might relate to the "anxiety" (again, justified or not) about the Church and sex abuse. Again, when it comes to public schools, people don't speak about how "the Public School Establishment is covering up sex abuse," or "the government is a bunch of pedophiles," or whatever -- and people tend to think of public schools not as a monolithic other, but as woven into communities of which they themselves are also a part. (Similarly, as a Catholic who's very involved with the Church, etc., I don't see the Church as a monolithic other, etc.)

I'm not quite sure what my point is, but basically, I think it's too easy to simply dismiss this article in "L’Avvenire"; I think it's touching on something -- some raw nerve, some insight -- that's at the very least kind of intriguing. Perhaps that's part of why it's angered people: it's frustratingly complicated, and hard to know how to react to. This is a bizarre analogy, but it's similar to how it would be hard to know how to react to, say, a lesbian white supremacist condemning the Church for not ordaining women and criticizing Pius XII for his anti-racist teachings in Humani Generis.

what is interesting but not addressed here is, why did this old story appear in the bishops' newspaper at this particular time?

Oh, I see why now, from John Allen's other NCR article today:

"Introvigne argued that Goebbels went about creating a “moral panic” about priestly pedophilia in 1937 as a form of payback for an anti-Nazi encyclical from Pope Pius XI. The nature of a moral panic, he asserts, is to take a handful of real cases, and then to distort their numbers beyond recognition."

The purpose of publishing this in the bishops' newspaper now is to imply that there are only a few real cases of priestly pederasty, but some evil force is distorting the numbers beyond recognition in order to discredit the church or the vatican or the pope.

Poor readers - can't read the article for what it says and intends - moral panic can happen, be it organized or not. Some truth and a lot of repetition of distortions or outright lies can inflame an entire society without some fighting steadfastly to expose the distortions and outright lies.

Hitler Youth - they had problems too? Of course, any group will, as we know, any time in history and in the future.

"Comparing the revelations of the victims of clerical sexual abusers to Nazi smear campaigns against Jews, Gypsys, Slavs, intellectuals, homosexuals, mentally & physically handicapped persons,etc, is ridiculous in confusing victims with perpetrators."

Don't be daft. No-one is criticizing the victims of sexual abuse. Nor is anyone criticizing that complacent bishops are brought to order. What is criticizable, however, is the media's exhumation, in recent weeks, of several decades old and long resolved cases of sexual abuse with the explicit aim of attempting to implicate Pope Benedict in some wrongdoing - solely in order to hurt the Church and the Faith.

This smear campaign may not be as coordinated and centralized as that of Goebbels, but it is a moral panic of the same type nonetheless.

I have never witnessed such a desperate grasping for ways to apologize for the Church. Why? These men allowed thousands of serial sex crimes to be committed against hundreds of thousands of adults alive today.

Every time the Church cooks up another ridiculous argument like this, they lose ground. John Allen just lost any bit of respect I still had for him as a journalist with this piece. It is totally off the wall, no reality to this analogy at all, except a desperate organization ineptly trying to use PR to make itself look better and instead they look worse and worse and worse.

Why not just admit they did these horrible crimes and start making real changes in the secrecy at the core of the Church, which is the real reason the crimes went on for decades.

No organization should have this much power and be this secret. Open all the doors, air the truth out on everything.

Without secrecy decades of sex crimes would not have happened.

But, instead, we get to watch the Church self destruct. No one is conducting an anti-catholic campaign. We are just victims seeking justice and we are tired of seeing our perpetrators being worshipped and respected when they are felons, plain and simple.

Read http://cityofangels8.blogspot.com to keep up with these criminals.

There has clearly been an attempt on the part of the publishing family that owns the New York Times, the Boston Globe and the International Herald Tribune to personally discredit Pope Benedict. The priest/director of the Wisconsin school for deaf boys where abuse took place was sent to the local equivalent of Siberia in 1974 and never had another assignment. The Vatican was not involved until the late '90s when three now middle-aged deaf men sued. The Vatican, and Pope Benedict only decided against a canonical trial a few weeks before the man died.
The fact that this old story which was well-publicized in the 1990s has been dragged up now makes me wonder if the Pope has been expected to make an important statement whose impact the publisher of those newspapers would like to reduce.

I found the translated article very imteresting One quote in particular summed up my own intuitive response to this issue

"The expression “moral panic” was only coined by sociologists in the 1970s to identify a social alarm created as a kind of art, accomplished by amplifying real facts and exaggerating their numbers through statistical folklore, as well as “discovering” and presenting as “new” events which in reality are already known and which date to the past. There are real events at the base of the panic, but their number is systematically distorted"

People have been confronted and shocked by the revelation of abuse and this natural and legitimate response has been exploited by individuals who hate the Church and all it stands for in this world because they know the Church is an obstacle to lies and the enslavement of the human family to false values which ultimately rob mankind of peace, love and hope.

Obviously the people who are questioning who would want the Church out of the way have not been keeping up with the news recently or have a very short attention span. It was the Bishops that opposed the health care bill because it did not include protections for the unborn, protections against euthanasia, and conscience rights protections. Obama and company are not above this type of thing (If anyone has enough of a memory these days to remember the last election, proof enough there!), and creating a moral panic (or dishing up some dirt on a political opponent) is a typical political tactic used by Democrats and Republicans alike. But it is sad that many Catholics (as can be evidenced by the comments on this page) are ready and willing to beat up their Mother the Church at the goading of their political party. For my part I will not pinch some salt and call Caesar "God" whether he be a Democrat or Republican.

History repeats again. The numbers are again exaggarated. If anything they show that there is much less sexual abuse in the church than anywhere else. And again the media is searching and paying monetary rewards for everyone who accuses the Pope or the Church of sexual abuse. There is absolutly no difference between the methods and goals of todays media and nazi propaganda.

Based on the feedback, one might say the article didn't go over well. However, lets get a few facts straight.
1. It is wrong to make an analogy between the "Hitler card" and whatever is the vogue issue. Caveat: This article isn't making an analogy. It is addressing source documents exposing bias in the current grevious situation. Mr. Allen has a valid point. It just isn't a popular one.
2. Throughout the 70's-90's the bishops were told by the psychological profession that these men could be "cured" and returned to active ministry. They trusted "the science." Unfortunately it has turned out to be pseudo-science. This in no way excuses prelates who shuffled the deck or enabled abusers with new assignments if their consciences set off alarms.
3. The Catholic Church is not addressing a "pedophile priest" scandal. We are talking about homosexual priests who targeted teen boys. In many cases we are talking about predators who actively shared information with eachother on how to "groom" poor boys with no father figures in the picture, gradually pulling down the barriers to abuse by gaining their trust, showering them with affection, then plying them with pornography, alcohol and drugs.
4. There have been false accusations made by those who either wanted a pile of money, or to further sully the reputation of the Church. This is just as bad as what some of the bishops have done. My point is that just because a priest is accused of abuse doesn't mean he committed abuse. Each case has to be tried on its merits.
5. Most of the abused don't want the media spotlight on them. They are embarassed that they were duped, are sickened by what the predators made them do or did to them. They don't want million dollar prizes. They want justice. They want help in dealing with the fallout. Believe it or not, many of them want the Church to reconcile with THEM and return to some minimal sense of semblence in their spiritual lives. Can you imagine how damaging the effects of this abuse can be? Every time you approach the heart of the Church, you're revisiting your own crime scene. Just to make a good confession, hear Mass and receive Communion requires you to walk through psychological hell.
6. It is clear to anyone with eyes that there is a smear campaign being carried out against the Church because of the abuse scandal. Where is it being orchestrated from? Who knows. That is the point Mr. Allen was making. But in the end does it matter? We need to be completely purified of this before we can move on with integrity. Judgment begins in the house of God first. Then, just maybe, "the world" will get what's coming. We should welcome the purification. It isn't going to "end" the Church. She'll be around until the return of Christ. But perhaps is will end the clerical careers of those who deserve it. Smear campaign or no, that is what is needed.

An old man was fond of saying, "I've made up my mind. Don't confuse me with the facts!" Perspective is important but it can give one a headache, huh? For some the issue is victims and their plight. For some it is a "cover up" by bishops and beyond. For some it is the Catholic Church, the sinful but holy, flawed but divine, earthly yet heavenly. Depending on where you live, the Catholic Church is persecuted and will always be for the good it does and the ignorance of others. The Church will also always be a source of scandal because of the sinfulness of those who make up the Church. The Church will grow and it will decline based on the faith of those who are called to follow Christ, but it will go on.

John Allen this is a good article.Today the media is propagating a smear campaign like the Nazi's to discredit the Church using the sins of a few.I just don't understand what cover-up had the Pope done in his previous role.All the incidents detailed my the media are 'smoking guns'.But as a Catholic I think, we as a Church should take collective responsibility and accept the sins of these paedophiles as ours and as the Pope has rightly said should do penance.Unfortunately many Catholics are mislead by this irrational media reporting on the Pope.But at the same time media has made us aware of our sins and we can never forget the pain and suffering this has brought on the Church's own children.This is time to wake up and undergo a conversion and help the abused.I am sure that the Church will turn victorious in the campaign against the culture of death which the media is advocating today.I challenge the media to throughly report on the cases of paedophilia elsewhere if they are really sincere.

I think the point of Massimo Introvign's essay is to be aware of the truth value of accusations. Without a doubt there is truth to the claim that abuses have occurred; that some in positions of authority have either covered up or at the very least are guilty of responding inadequately; and that there are some systemic flaws in the governance of the Church that have greatly exacerbated the problem. At the same time, there is also no doubt that a climate of moral panic has developed. It seems to me that the lesson of history suggested by Introvign is to beware of the fog of false notions that such panic causes.

For example, it strikes me that a pattern shows up on all sides of this issue whereby people fall easily to the impulse to demonize persons and institutions on every other side. Every cleric and bishop, and every reporter and news outlet is complicit in perversions and conspiracies -- so say the panicked minds and cry the panicked hearts.

Massimo Introvign's essay is a call to calm and reason so that truth and justice may prevail. I second the notion.

Has Allen thrown us a canard? Many seem to think so, but perhaps not. It is necessary to understand and analyze the policies and governance structures that led bishops to cover-up sexual abuse by clerics and shelter them from the penalties of the civil code. Such abuse of governance does merit moral indignation, absolutely. But the intransigence of indignation does not lead to understanding, justice or reform. It does, however, certify one as one of the righteous. The issue here is the sociological phenomenon of "moral panic." That is a genuine phenomenon documented, for example, by Le Febvre to have occured during the French Revolution. The current situation seems to be similar to the panic during the 90's about sexual abuse practiced during satanic rites. It was everywhere. It provided adults an opportunity to display moral outrage and dissociate themselves from such desires. We need to change the way that the governance of the Church operates. At the present time decision making is paralyzed by Roman centralization. We need structures of mutuality so that lay men and women can exercise responsibility for the mission of the Church. That is part of the solution and more important than moral panic.

The avvenire.it link to the Introvigne article has been disabled at the source.

Plan B:
http://www.cesnur.org/2010/mi-goebbels.html
http://www.lucisullest.it/dett_news.php?id=5750

It is true that there is a crucial difference between the recent articles in the NYTimes (especially the Murphy and Kiesle cases) and, say, the reveleations by the press in Boston in 2002. All the NYTimes stories referred to very old cases and seemed to have as a major focus not the revelation of abuses but rather a possible involvement of the Pope (which in both cases was highly marginal). Coming on the heels of the Catholic opposition to abortion-friendly health reform, this may suggest an attempt on the part of the media to create a "moral panic" like the one described by Introvigne.

I think some of us are missing the point here.

The article does not deny the victims or the horrific affects of the abuse. It is not trying to say this is all a Nazis like witch hunt without and basis in truth. What it is saying is that similar to the Nazis, the press are using this story to smear and discredit the church. I think what we are missing in this fine but important point-is this. Members of our society do exist-some who are in the press- and they have a specific agenda. This agenda is motivated by a misguided belief that the moral voice-the church- has suppressed sexual freedom. For these people, true freedom is found in sexual expression. These same people believe that sexual freedom will be attained when the moral voice is silenced. To silence the authority or influence of the moral voice it must be discredited. I know this to be true and factual because I was a recent observer at the UN during 20101 CSW, and many groups made no bones about this motive. They were quite clear in their goal and how they would accomplish this goal, and I witnessed their words first hand.
Back to the point – it is obvious to me they are using the same methodology used by the Nazis to accomplish their goals. They are not motivated by empathy or altruism towards the victims- if they were their coverage would not be exaggerated, distorted, and malicious. None of these factors, BTW, invite compassion for the victims.

I was recently reading Victor Klemperors diary accounts of life under the Third Reich, from 1933 until 1941. He writes about the Nazis slandering priests using sexual abuse propaganda. While I was reading It occurred to me this was similar to what is happening in some of today’s media accounts of sexual abuse. Victor arrived at the same conclusion as I and the author of this article. Victor Klemperer was a Jew who converted to Protestantism-I doubt he was favourable to Catholics but he arrived at the same conclusion as this author. Only Victor saw it for what it was while he was living through it. The Nazis took real events –exaggerated- distorted- attempting to cause moral panic – in other word words use these events as propaganda tools with no concern whatsoever for the victims

If we do not put everything in its proper perspective the victims will be re-victimized as objects used to discredit the church. They need to be treated as victims of crimes perpetuated by some men and yes re-victimized by the neglect –sometimes criminal neglect -of some bishops.

I conclude acknowledging those members of the press who are reporting with a balanced perspective which in the end will help the victims and help the church reform.

There is little question that in 1937 Adolf Hitler's attitude toward, and thus strategy regarding the major Christian Religious traditions in Germany underwent a considerable shift. Up until that point, Hitler had hoped to create some sort of grand synthesis among Protestant and Catholic traditions with National Socialism, and to enlist the synthesis in his German Nationalist program of destroying Bolshevism and world Jewry, and it should be remembered, he used the terms interchangably...as synonyms. In 1937 Hitler recognized such a goal was unrealizable, and tactically made several moves against continued influence of all the German Churches. It seems the events which set off this process were the failures of Protestants and Catholics to adopt aspects of his (Hitler's) world view, particuarly vis a vis the then ongoing Spanish Civil War.

My source on this is the work of Klaus Scholder, who was Professor of Theology and Church History at Tubingen in the 1960's till his death in the 1980's -- the Protestant collegue and contemporary of both Ratzinger and Kuhn, and author of the two volume "The Churches and the Third Reich" (1987). One can also consult the shorter edited Scholder, "A Requiem for Hitler: and other Perspectives on the German Church Struggle" (Trinity, Philadelphia, 1988) for an overview. Scholder's writings are a product of a major ecumenical effort at Tubingen in the late 60's and 70's to examine the many threaded relationships among and between Churches, Theological Traditions, and the Third Reich. As I see this the Sociologist Introvigne is simply describing one of many tactics Hitler and the Nazi's deployed against the German Churches after Hitler's change in approach in 1937.

Scholder puts the change in tactics as follows...

"...in a speech made to propaganda leaders in October 1937...Hitler declared that after hard inner struggle he had freed himself from the childish views of religion then still around, "Now I feel as fresh as a colt in the meadow"." Hitler went on to develop his analysis of all Christian Churches as too linked to World Jewry, too contaminated by Judaism, and thus like Capitalism and Bolshevism, needed to be destroyed. (see p. 179, Requiem).

Allen needs to site the Introvigne discovery of Hitler's particular tactics in the overall history of German Churches dealings with the Nazi State and Leadership -- there was a context for this after all. Likewise another important distinction is apparent. In the Nazi times, this was a struggle between and among various corporate entities for the power to define World View. The present problem is quite different, it is far less an institutional conflict, much more about an institutional stance and practice and the manner in which that is disfunctional with the contemporary focus on individual civil and human rights.

Thank you, Mr. Allen.
The NY Times dredging up cases that had already been widely published in prior years and pulling them together near Holy Week follows previous episodes of evident hostility to organized Christianity, such as the fake "Discovery of the Tomb of Jesus and his family" near Holy Week in a prior year. There does not need to be a "proof", such as the Goebbels correspondence, to become aware of the active hostility of the current MainStream Media (MSM) to traditional Christian teachings on abortion, same-sex marriage and similar evils. This first surfaced in the amazing willingness of the MSM to perpetuate charges against Pius XII that first emerged in a 1963 play - "The Deputy". These charges were of supposed sympathy of the Vatican to Hitler and the Third Reich. Easy disproof: editorials in the NY Times in Dec. 1941 and Dec. 1942, and widespread enconiums from both Israeli and expatriate Jews at the time of Pius's death in 1958.
However, the 1960's "Free Speech" generation has taken over the editorial and reportorial desks of the MSM, in which advancing the cultural agenda takes precedence over actually reporting new information. The technique of the recycling of charges against Catholic clergy dating back for decades, while ignoring scandalous behaviour of personnel in the current years in New York school systems (which dwarfs the reported cases against the Catholics in the same time period, even after adjusting for the larger number of NY teachers) does show an obvious parallel to the Goebbels' orchestrated technique.
TeaPot562

A so called smear campaign would have very little affect, if the Catholic hierachy
'squared up'fully to its responsibilities regarding the sexual abuse.
I see the Pope is making some headway with his meeting with victims of
abuse in Malta.

There are indeed many parallels with what happened in the 1930s Germany and in our current situation. Read the timelines! There is the steady erosion of rights. There is a ever widespread moral disintegration. There is a government taking more and more control over all areas of life. And there always is a scapegoat. The hypocracy in incredible!

In the 1930s Germany, guilt or innocent was beside the point! Religious and academic people were sought out for extermination. And they were exterminated. We are not to that point. But do not think for one minute we as a country are not capable of coming to that point. Laws are being put into place for it. We just need that "national emergency" to take us over the line. And the weak swine flu just did not cut it. But there was talk of mandatory innoculation and fines for not having it. I wonder what will be cooked up next?

The moral depraved who want 'consent' for sexual activities given to 10 year old and want homosexuality to be taught to children and approve of the taking of the lives of the unborn souls are the very ones "shocked" that there ever could have been homosexual abuse in the Catholic church. What about everywhere else?

The thing an evil agenda fears most is for the Catholic Church to coalesce. Keeping the Church divided is the tactic and it is working well. Keep it under the gun and look for every skeleton and make up some if you need to. Those moral teachings must be made to look ridiculous and unliveable! They are an affront to the 'progressive illuminated' mind. Yes, so was Our Lord.

The fact that even Goebbels was shocked by the reality of clergy sexual abuse should give us pause.

Why the fuss over this article?

Historically, smear campaigns have been very successfull; famous examples being against the Church and the Nobility prior to the French Revolution; against the Jews prior to the Holocaust; against the Orthodox Church and the Tzarist Autocracy prior to the 1917 October Rising and against the Church prior to the Spanish Civil War.

Are smear campaignes harmless? Each of the above resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands - of tens of millions if you are talking about the Holocaust and Russian Revolution.

Suggesting a correction: Fr. Mariaux did not found the Marian Congregation, but another small group from the elites of Sao Paulo society. Prof. Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira was not part of this group. When Fr. Mariaux left Brazil he handed the group over to Dr. Plinio.

For those of us who know something about the history of "The Third Reich",
this analogy is lacking. For Mr. Allen to call Dachau an "extermination" camp
instead of a "concentration" camp shows his lack of knowledge of Nazi Germany.
There were 6 extermination camps and hundreds of concentration camps. Dachau
being the first. An important difference. I suggest reading, "Hitler's Priests" by Kevin Spicer.

It is clear that there is a smear campaign going on against the Roman Catholic Church, thank God someone pointed it out.
No amount of complacent "oh, we're sorry" is going to save us, it's articles like this that need to get the truth out. The Church is on its own against the onslaught of leftist smears; it doesn't even get the usual support victims of the left-wing propaganda machines get from the American Right-Wing -the only considerable conservative voice in the Western World-, because said America Right-Wing is Protestant. So what if, there's only been six credible reports of abuse in 2009 as opposed to 10% of public school children being abused? You're only going to hear about the Church...

http://www.amazon.com/b?_encoding=UTF8&site-redirect=&node=51569011&tag=...