Yes, those who KNOWINGLY and deliberately did wrong should be punished.
But how many of these bishops–at the time that they were ‘reassigning’ these priests–KNEW that: 1. The said priest was NOT ‘cured’ even though medical experts and the priest himself assured the bishop he WAS cured. 2. Without doubt, sending this priest to a new parish would ENSURE that the priest would sin again. 3. Deliberately defied the law–or, to put it differently, at the TIME there was a LAW of mandatory reporting FOR the church which the bishop did not report to.
Very few bishops in the 60s, 70s, 80s, even early 90s (and I do not believe that there has been documentation of incidents beyond this time which were NOT immediately reported when discovered) knew that pedophilia is not treatable/curable–because until said 90s MEDICAL EXPERTS thought it WAS (the same ones who assured us in 1971 that homosexuality should no longer be considered a ‘disorder’ BTW).
Is ANY bishop a mind reader? Bearing in mind point 1–the idea that pedophilia was considered ‘curable’–how can any person, bishop or not, be totally convinced that this ‘cured’ person would DEFINITELY sin again? Need I remind you that the Catholic faith is a faith FOR SINNERS–by this, I mean that the whole idea of repentence and forgiveness is in itself most Christian. We Christians are famous for giving ‘second chances’–not to mention 70 x 7 chances–to sinners. We tend to believe someone who says that he has sinned but repents and won’t sin again. It is, may I remind you again, above all the responsibility of the person who actually sins, first and foremost.
Finally, there are the points of differing cultural standards. In 2006 we ‘let it all hang out’. In 1966 we did NOT. So-called ‘silence’ and coverups were for the protection of the VICTIM, not the sinner (who often did suffer penance, let’s not assume that all these sinners just said an our father and be done with it). And silence and coverups were NOT limited to the church. Abuses, particularly sexual abuses, were ‘covered up’ whether they took place in a school, a home, whatever. . . Look even today when a woman is raped, we STILL have people thinking “what did she wear or do to ENTICE THE MAN”. I can assure you that people, yes people in 2006, will hear of a young child being abused by her father and will blame the CHILD, won’t want their children to ASSOCIATE with the child or any part of the family, will point fingers, throw stones, etc.
I’m not saying that these stories should not ‘come out’ insofar as they bring or attempt to bring someone to justice for a crime. But I AM saying that sometimes, speaking of a crime like this winds up being harmful to the victim while sometimes the sinner walks away scot free. And this harm will last the lifetime of the victim. It is not all cut-and-dried, black-and-white. Likewise, there are times when an INNOCENT person is FALSELY accused (this did happen both in my diocese a few years ago and also with Cardinal Bernardin I recall). There are still people who revile both this priest and the Cardinal even though they were innocent.
I think that there should be much less frenzy and stone-throwing and much MORE real impartial justice, toward both victim and accused. . .whether for priests, laity, children. . .
I think it is unhealthy for there to be so much emphasis on any one group’s ‘sins’ (as though only priests abused) or to act as though it is only because they are Catholic priests (as if the Catholic faith itself embraces pedophilia) that they sin, and unfortunately this is the message that many walk away with. When I start seeing ‘equal coverage’ of abuse, when I see the same emphasis given to abusers who are fathers, teachers, etc., when I start hearing that fathers abuse because it’s part of being a man, that teachers abuse because they are in positions of authority, that special opprobrium should be heaped on incestuous fathers because they defy a universal ban on sex with not only a child but his own flesh and blood, and on teachers because they are role models and authority for children. . .and when I start hearing that the reason these men abused is because they are atheists, Jews, Muslims, Protestants, etc. . .then I might consider the current media frenzy BALANCED in coverage.
:banghead: Will it ever end Lord? 