It's time to put away the stones

And, here is the real root of the problem: "after a few months of therapy, the diocese placed the priest back into ministry". Bishops were conned (like the rest of society) into believing that psychologists could "heal" or "cure" sexual abusers. I have lost count of the number of times psychologists over the years assured prelates that priest abusers were "cured" and "would never commit this act again"; only to find that this priest, when returned to ministry, commits the act yet again, be returned to therapy, and then have a psychologist assure the prelate that this priest is "cured" and "would never commit this act again". If the bishops have anything to answer for, it is their foolish reliance on the false "science" of psychology.

In the meantime, the bishops acted in the same manner in which society reacted, make no big deal about it. If this writer were familiar with history, she would recognize the fact that, prior to the mid-to -late 80s, the sexual abuse of minors was not considered to be anything all that serious. Abusers were often given slaps on the wrist by the "impartial government officials" charged with punishing criminals; abusers were not punished harshly and were not subject to the same level of public odium as they are currently. The Church, in her handling of abuse cases, was following the trends of the rest of the world. One can debate the wisdom of telling a victim that the priest abuser would not work with kids anymore, but beyond that, the actions of the Church were not even remotely beyond the pale given the attitude of the rest of society prior to the mid-to-late 80s.

Finally, the suggestion that government officials investigate Mother Church is ludicrous. Mother Church is not subject to government officials specifically to protect her right to preach the Gospel. Ms. Sotelo would surrender that freedom to the government for...what?

These priests just keep making Jesus weep all over again. Their denial is iron-clad, and seemingly incapable of being penetrated by the truth. I am glad young theologians, like you Nicole, have the courage to speak the truth. I believe strongly that God is going to continue allowing the Catholic Church to break because of its refusal to be forthcoming. How odd that the very Church they sought to protect is the one that will crumble because they protected it for the wrong reasons. What they have failed to face has finally faced them. How could they have not known it would?

Yes Nicole! well said - well written. But it is too late to ask the Roman leadership to do anything, even put down their stones. I think it is time to start an American Catholic Concilliar church. Meaning that we would be guided by "Councils." I would like "Call to Action" to call a council. Invite people who feel the Holy Spirit moving their hearts. Together we can decide how to proceed. I have a lot of ideas.

But I really need to say to the fellows in Rome "ENOUGH! THIS ABUSE HAS TO STOP! YOU ARE FIRED." This systemic international problem of child abuse means that people have to engage their consciences and say we can no longer listen to or go with your corrupt leadership.

To continue your use of the papable, it is time for the LCWR to "sin no more!"

Our Holy Father Benedict will handle the situation just fine. God will give him the strength the guide the Barque of Peter through these troubled waters. We should all pray for him.

As for the visitation: Give up the whining. It's happening, so that's that. I believe it will result in great help to our religious communities, but then I'm not sufferring from the paranoid delusion that everything that Rome does is a dark plot either.

St. Michael the Archangel, defend and strengthen our Holy Father. Amen!

It is so obvious yet, when spelled out as Ms Sotelo had done so briefly and succinctly, it hits very hard.

It is some time now since I last read through the letter, written by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger (2004) and authorized by Pope John Paul II "...on the collaboration of women and men in the church and in the world", but, as I recall, one of the most telling arguments, outside of biblical and theological, for the exclusion of women from priesthood and for their general subservience to men,(sorry for the long sentence)is the toughness of men (thus women's weakness) to stand up to real evil. Of course, women who are by creation/nature and by Christ's dictate to serve, wait(ress), are also called to "mitigate" where necessary male's tendency to lose himself in his stringency and strength. If all this were simply a novel no one would read it because of its lack of credability.

The fact, the motivation, the methodology, the hypocricy, the injustice, the of the visitation/investigation in itself is shameful. When one considers the conditions, timing, circumstances and actors it becomes virtually sinful.

As usual, the Bishops would seem to be poor armed to do battle with knowledgeable and intelligent lay and religious individuals. Little damage will be done by the stones while the Bishops and other Episcopal-types are fleeing from the boulders headed their way.

Maybe the Inquisition would be better aimed in its needed direction---the Papacy, the Episcopacy and the clerical. To continue to deflect criticism by alluding to the larger number of the groups above who may not ever have been engaged in such behavior is "begging the question." One perpetrator--actual or conspirator--is too many. It remains to be seen how the message of Jesus will play out: he to whom much is given much will be required in return.

I couldn't have said it better. All evidence is that the Bishops do not comprehend just how seriously their moral authority has been undermined by their handling of this pervasive and growing scandal in the Church. Nicole is right on in saying that the part of the Church that needs to be investigated is the Hierarchy - the one arrogant enough to not see the log in its own eye. The Bishops keep changing the subject to get the spotlight off their own huge failure of leadership and integrity. As the ones who pay their salaries and heating bills, the laity had better start demanding accountability. Nicole's commentary is a great example of how to do just that.

This is the worst example of self-serving pseudo-exegesis I've seen outside of fundamentalist circles. There is no evidence that bishops in general, or US bishops in particular, are attempting to stone women religious, literally or figuratively. I happen to disagree with the nature and scope of the investigation, but that doesn't entitle me to distort scripture to make a point for which I can't proffer other arguments.

The writer shows no evidence for the extraordinary statement: "I am sure that there are thousands more cases in the United States and across the globe where survivors remain afraid to speak out, have committed suicide because they were unable to bear the trauma or have since passed away." An undergrad would know better to make such unsupported claims.

The story of the woman caught in adultery, originally part of the Lucan Gospel, teaches that the sexual sins which seem unforgivable to us are forgiven by an all-merciful God. Given the writer's obvious self-righteousness, there may be a lesson there for us all.

I applaud NCR's efforts to provide young writers in order to attract a younger audience, but I encourage you to find writers who report facts, not convenient fictions, and who understand that the scriptures were not written for their amusement.

No more PAPAL BULL!
"When allegations of cover-up rise to include the highest official in an institution, that same official must recuse himself and his staff from conducting the probe."
And no letter to the people of Ireland on the feast of Saint Joseph, Patron Saint of the Holy Family is gonna change that.
RESIGN NOW, RATZINGER!
It's your ONLY choice.

Pretty lame defense of the visitation, following 2 visitation of US seminaries. Somthing happened in there 50 years ago so let's not see what's happening here today.

Though I haven't attended church for many years, my interest and concern for the church continues. Nicole's writing and a lot else on this website keep my interest and concern alive and even the beginnings of a flicker of hope for the institution.

Thank you for your opinion & excellent advice.

What about the LCWR's (Leadership Conference of Women Religious) response to victims of abuse by nuns?

Father Tom Doyle writes on Richard Sipes' website:

"The sexual and physical abuse by nuns is far more widespread than most people are aware of. The nuns have been protected by the inability of most people to believe that such things were possible but I can assure you, they were possible and the reality is far worse than one could imagine.

In light of the highly visible and vocal support of most contemporary nuns, including their leadership in LCWR for victims of social injustice both inside and outside the Church, we would certainly expect that they would quickly respond openly, honestly and with compassion to victims of religious women.

The opposite has been true.

The religious congregations of women who have been sued have fought the victims with a viciousness that was equal to or exceeded that of many bishops. The LCWR has treated the victims who have tried to communicate with them in a disgraceful and downright unchristian manner.

They have been as cold, as clerical, as arrogant and as dishonest as the bishops.

They have refused to even consider cleaning the mess in their own house.

They have treated those who have brought the mess to their attention with cruelty and disdain."

http://www.richardsipe.com/Doyle/2009/sexual_abuse_by_nuns.htm

I think the most subversive aspect to all that you describe is the erosion of trust. Victims can take their own healing into their own hands and decide not to be victims anymore, but they must speak out or the perpetrators will continue.

Dives (the hierarchy) and Lazarus (the rest of us), the hypocrisy of the pharisees, and the beat plays on.

I have heard some people blame the media for spreading untruth. In this case, beginning with the Porter case in Massachusetts and continuing there, we should be thanking the press for naming the darkness in the Church.

I hope Church leadership will put human beings and the Gospel first and not the idea of protecting the image of the Church - that the leadership has so tarnished.

Who can we trust?

Give me one reason to stay here, so the song goes.

I stay for Christ and my brothers and sisters. The hierarchy needs our prayers because, obviously, they cannot take care of themselves - and this goes for the mess in Boulder, too.

As for the investigation of us religious women? This too will pass away and the truth of authentic witness of those who have borne the heat of the day will prevail. I believe this. I know my sisters and I trust in God's grace that will sustain the poor, the anawim.

We need a visitation of the bishops by the nuns. It is the mendacious and self-serving bishops who are undoing our beloved Church, not the good nuns who have served with little thanks and none of the pomp and self-importance that goes with a bishop's chair.

Steve

The sad characterization that opens this article suggests the author knows the bishops' minds about the "visitation" of religious women. In essence, she has a stone in her pocket as well. And the analogy wanes because in the gospel story the woman was caught in adultery. Is Ms. Sotelo suggesting the women religious have been "caught" in some wrong doing, but since the bishops are sinners too they ought not to question the women religious?

I absolutely agree that the bishops must stand trial, must face an inquisition, and the truth must stand on its own merits. But who will do the adjudicating? It seems we are righteous in saying the bishops cannot stand in judgment because of their sins. Who, then, is without sin? Are civil authorities without sin? Do we respect civil authority over the ecclesiastical authority of the bishops? Are we wanting 'a pound of flesh' from the bishops? Are we wanting civil authorities to be our "stone-throwing surrogates?"

Other than Jesus, who among us is in a position to judge and condemn?

The hierarchical structure is beginning to unravel and within the next 20 years we will see it undone. The church will be transformed in a tumultuous, rancorous period of time. Until then, we must lay down all our stones; we must "neither condemn," and we must go and sin no more.

Well said. Thank you for your well writtem article. Yes, it is time, "far beyond time for the truth," as you indicate.

Quote from earlier posting: "In the meantime, the bishops acted in the same manner in which society reacted, make no big deal about it. If this writer were familiar with history, she would recognize the fact that, prior to the mid-to -late 80s, the sexual abuse of minors was not considered to be anything all that serious. Abusers were often given slaps on the wrist by the "impartial government officials" charged with punishing criminals; abusers were not punished harshly and were not subject to the same level of public odium as they are currently. The Church, in her handling of abuse cases, was following the trends of the rest of the world. One can debate the wisdom of telling a victim that the priest abuser would not work with kids anymore, but beyond that, the actions of the Church were not even remotely beyond the pale given the attitude of the rest of society prior to the mid-to-late 80s."

What utter nonsense! I was around, and an adult, in the Sixties and I knew raping children was wrong! Why didn't the bishops? It's the only sin Jesus personally threatened people about (remember the one about the millstone around their neck and the deepest part of the ocean?)

And as for the slap on the wrist, more tripe! I was on a committee to find a child abuser in the scouts and he got 10-20 years hard time.

Oh, and the old blame-the-psychologists routine: The bishops were responsible. They might believe a pedophile was cured if there was a one-time event, but the average pedophile abused 50 or more children. How many times would they have to see it, and approve the transfer, before they realized "the cure" wasn't working?

Please don't try to white wash the bishops. They is nothing to be said on their behalf. They were criminally involved both by canon law and civil law. Let Justice be done.

Memo to Clint Green and those who justify hierarchical failure to act on or contributed to the the sexual abuse of children by suggesting that “sexual molestation” of children was “no big deal” and “prior to the mid-to -late 80s, the sexual abuse of minors was not considered to be anything all that serious”:.

Associated Press, reported March 21, 2010 (Portland Ore.) by William McCall: “On Friday, (Attorney Paul) Mones showed a jury a 1935 New York Times article that said the Scouts (Boy Scouts of America) had 2910 “cards” on men who were unfit to supervise young boys. The display came as he questioned Nate Marshall, a Scouts executive from headquarters in Irving, Texas, now in chrge of those files. Marshall estimated that about 30 percent of the men flagged between 1920 and 1935 had sexually abused Scouts.
Mones also showed the jury a table Marshall prepared that showed the Boy Scouts amassed 1,123 “perversion” files from 1965-85 which Marshall said were simply a tool to track child molesters and remove them or prevent them from moving to another city and trying to join another Scout troop”.

Mark 9:42 and Luke 17:2 would suggest the percieved seriousness as beginning somewhat earlier.

Andrew 105 thanks for posting Thomas Doyle`s writing and Richard Sipe`s writings, I have read one of their brave, courageous books about sex abuse in the Church. I am so very grateful for their courage, their integrity., their research, their suggestions for corrections of church wrongs.

BOTH religious and nun organizations NOT just LCWR that C one as well: the leadership group that Millea belongs to, also has abusive female religious and abusive nuns too.

Please we can NOT just shine a light on one and not on the other organization group of leadership of women religious and nuns.

Systemic secrecy and institutional cruelty must not be allowed to continue. BOTH women religious leadership groups need to answer to any abuses, physical abuses, psychological abuses, sexual abuses of victims. I recently took a course at university which had a nun and a lay university professors. The nun who was very traditional (veil, habit) humiliated people in the ocurse and was very cruel. The lay professor was exemplorary and tried to diplomatically stop her abuses. This nun belonged to the Millea type organization so please do not blame the one religious order leadership group and not the other.

This same nun had been in the school system for years and described how she interacted with teachers and students. She was cruel in her relating of her experiences and we were horrified to realize she thought her behavior had been okay. A mindset of denial and entitlement to belittle and to harm others. BOTH religious leadership organizations need to answer and address abusive behaviors and that INCLUDES the traditional, Millea type groups too.
Thank you Andrew 105 for reminding us of this!

In Mass yesterday when our priest discussed John 8:7 he focused on the "go and sin no more" aspect that we as sinners should attend to, not the moral peril of sinners casting the first stone. I was surprised that he ignored the wonderful balance of perspective embodied within John 8:7. Are more years of "blame the victim" in our future?

It's ironic that so many commenters are throwing stones at those whom they accuse of throwing stones. Apparently hatred and pride are the answer to scandal.

All I have to say, as a Catholic of fifty years that if Catholics, be they lay or priest, cannot nurture and protect children, what can they do?

Clint Green et al: As far as I am concerned your obsequious request has already been responded to by Anonymous Catholic quite eloquently and, indeed my subsequent posts to you. I would repeat that what I also include as reprehensible among your repeated statements is the facile, and unconsciousionable attribution of responsibility to psychologists, psychiatrists and other therapists what is intrinsically and ethically and legally the responsibility of the hierarchical decision makers, regardless of what “advice” they may have recieved. You have a moral obligation to intellectual honesty, the absence of which I see as not excused by a fundamentalist adherence to what you define as “Mother Church”

“Should the bishops be held accountable for doing what everyone else (principals, teachers, law enforcement, judges, etc.) did in similar circumstances? No.” , you persist. Wrong. The bishops are/were not “everybody else”. The bishops are responsible and were singely and totally responsible for the decisions they make as administrative and religious leaders and responsible managers of their dioceses. As constituting “the fullness of priesthood” bishops have an especial and unique responsibility (as so many have insisted in the health care debate) to stand unncompromisingly for what is right and just, particularly, God's children. As the Boy Scouts of America example, the therapist of Father H and Scripture itself attest you also abuse the notion of “everybody”.

If the “church” as hierarchical institution is to have any credibility as a contributor to the “moral and social issues of the day” it must regain respect by appropriate action, especialy, but not solely in regard to an issue of perennial significance, the custody of children. Inspite of the hierarchical institution, the church as the people of God is gaining in the strength of independent intelligence as a gift of the creator and as a medium of Christ's message and the Holy Spirit.

The merit in your words, and I searched diligently to find some, is that a male dominated society has a long, sad, sick and sinful history of abusing the weak.

This article is a perfect example of a red herring. Good job.

Nicole,

Why does it have to be an either/or situation - why can't both investigations go on simultaneously?

No big deal? Pete, please provide just one example of a secular institution treating child rape as "no big deal"? You lie so much you could be a Bishop.

What Nicole is saying is, put away your stones so I can hurl my cheap shots at the Pope.