assassin99:
There was a recent mention on the news of 700 or so more cases of credible child abuse committed by Catholic priests, mostly occurring several years ago, I think. Nary a mention of it anywhere on these forums, though (but plenty of posts against gay marriage and in favor of global warming, etc).
How can the enormous problem of priest sexual abuse be understood? What kind of church is the Catholic church, if a substantial minority of its priests are child abusers? Who would want to join the Catholic church? If this is really the One Truth Faith that Comes to Us from the Apostles, why are there so many perverts preaching its word? Every single instance of abuse I hear about makes me question my Catholic faith. And what about the abused? Surely the image of Father O’Malley touching their private parts understandably would discourage them from retaining their Catholic faith. If the abused no longer believe, are they going to hell? Why would God let his One True Faith mess up people like that?
I don’t blame you whatsoever for feeling this way. The abuse cases that did occur are horrible acts by those who work in God’s name. I won’t say unforgivable, but I wouldn’t want any one of those priests serving parishes. They should be either booted out or given jobs with no interaction with young people. Zero tolerance in that regard.
I don’t blame anyone for thinking “What the heck is going on?!?” and questioning the church’s actions during the crisis.
But let’s look a bit closer at the situation. Studies have shown that the level of priestly abuse is at least even with that of the rest of society or even a little lower. That’s not an excuse, thats just fact. However, the level of priestly abuse should not be a little lower than the rest of society—it should be either astonishingly lower or even non-existent. There are different standards for priests over the rest of society, even over other religious figures, i.e. ministers, rabbis etc. Priests should be held to these standards.
Overwhelmingly the cases of abuse that have been proven true involve victims of young men or boys ages around 12-17. The perpetrators overwhelmingly have been homosexual men (priests).
The cases of what is in the general public’s mind of a priest abusing a little child are relatively rare.
Those are the facts, whether people want to discuss them or not.
Which is not to say that homosexual priests can’t be good priests, indeed almost all of them are. But many of the priests have developed as a priest in a more permissive environment seen over the last few decades, in seminary, general public life, and priestly life. They have been taught, especially at seminary, many things that are contrary to what used to be taught, especially regarding sexual “freedom” and the authority of the church (big subject).
Am I saying that “the priests were homosexual, so that answers it” ? No. I am saying it was a combination of things, all of which put personal wants first and God second.
There’s a reason that all this abuse has taken place almost exclusively in America.
Did the church handle it well? Yes and no. The church really relied on “modern” advice on a lot of this. The bishops handling these cases were told by psychologists the way to handle the problem and they took the advice. Not good. It blew up in their faces. Also, some of the bishops felt a kinship to these priests–a lot went through formation at the same time and had many of the same attitudes and beliefs.
Actions of any person or persons in the church do not make the church not the true church. We are a church of sinners, not a church of saints. But should priests be held to a much higher standard? Of course, which is why things are changing so much in seminaries and dioceses.
Who is behind this evil? Well, who is behind all evil? What better way to draw people away from the Church than to try to entice its most respected members do something horrible?
