Bp Schneider lists 4 causes of sex abuse crisis

[commenter]

It is the culture of cover-up and protecting the institution at any and all costs that is the true scandal, and that was/is what clericalism breeds.

Before you jump to conclusions about clericalism, keep in mind the same kind of ineffective response was carried out by Protestant denominations, by public school districts, by public and private agencies for children and disabled persons .you can’t judge the scope and extent by media coverage.

Having said that, yes the Church response was as bad as everyone else, and that is deplorable. Bishop Schneider’s theory doesn’t cover all the data. Most theories don’t. We don’t know the details about Cardinal O’Brien and other personal and spiritual lives.

 

[Rockoh22]

I am confused. I am understanding mixed signals.

You seem very upset that people say we have a homosexual problem, and that it does nothing to accept it. Then you agreed with me that Homosexuality is part of the problem. Then you say that what the Bishop said you place at the bottom of the list. And prop up Clericalism. Mind you I know that at least Pope Benedict XVI and Pope Francis have spoken against allowing gay men to be priest. Are they on the bottom of your list also? I mean no disrespect when I ask this. I do not know how to word it nice.

By the way you can believe all you want, it does nothing to me. What I say also matters nothing, I have zero power or influence in anything other than the people that live under my roof. What I am confused about is your mixed signals. Then you guys argue about Vatican II and so on.

Tis all confusing, and besides, what can we do to help the church?

 

[Cathoholic]

CilladeRoma . . .

It is the “fixation” on homosexuality I have a problem with.

You understand the John Jay Law study discussed the
eighty percent association with same-sex abuse?
(I understand an “association” does not necessarily translate into a “cause-and-effect”.)

Would you mind quoting to me the section of the John Jay study that unmasks the incidence of “clericalism” in the priesthood or at least among the abusers and WHY you see THAT as a cause and effect?

And when the Bishops told us back in 2002, that the cause was bad psychology and they were merely listening to the best psychology parameters of the day?

Do you think the Bishops were wrong then?

Or were they wrong in 2009 when bishop Blaise Cupich chalked the problem up to a “reflection of society”? (Certainly society isn’t “clericalistic” about priests. Many in society don’t even believe in the priesthood.)

From our USCCB (back in 2009) . . .

[

United States Conference of Catholic Bishops​

22,028 subscribers
](https://m.youtube.com/user/usccb)

SUBSCRIBE

Published on Dec 11, 2009

Bishop Blase Cupich of the Diocese of Rapid City and Chair of the USCCB Committee for the Protection of Children and Young People, talks with Msgr.J ames Vlaun and Sr. Mary Alice Piil, CSJ of Telecare TV about the work of the committee during the 2009 Fall General Assembly in Baltimore.

Was (now) Cardinal Cupich wrong then? If he wasn’t WHY change to “clericalism” now?

If he WAS WRONG then, WHY accept “clericalism” this time around?

What studies can you cite showing “clericalism” turns someone into a homosexual predator?

 

[OraLabora]

What studies can you cite showing “clericalism” turns someone into a homosexual predator?

I don’t think the problem is that it turns someone into a homosexual predator. I think it helps create a climate where those already predators or potential predators can act with relative impunity. Especially in a situation where perfect chastity is expected of everyone, and possibly quite a high proportion of clergy including bishops have something to hide. It turns into a bit of an old boys club: “if you keep quiet about my gay lover or my housekeeper or my weekly trips to the red light district, I’ll quietly transfer you to another parish”.

Let’s not kid ourselves, clergymen are human and subjected to the same temptations as everyone.

 

[Cathoholic]

OraLabora . . .

I don’t think the problem is that it (clericalism) turns someone into a homosexual predator. I think it helps create a climate where those already predators or potential predators can act with relative impunity. Especially in a situation where perfect chastity is expected of everyone . . .

(Parenthetical addition mine for context)

First of all, I think there is some truth to what you are saying here. (I just don’t think it goes far enough.)

Schoolteachers are not clerics. There is no “clericalism” in public schools.

Why is there abuse there?

“Perfect chastity” is not expected among public school teachers in the same sense as Catholic priests.

Let’s not kid ourselves, clergymen are human and subjected to the same temptations as everyone.

OK. But if “priests” are “like everyone else” why invoke “clericalism”?

After all, everyone else in society is not “clericalistic”.

Why “clericalism”? (Where there is NO evidence.) What is the evidence of this besides a hunch?

And if hunches are acceptable, why is it wrong for people to be concerned about the 80% homosexual aspect on their “hunches”? (Where there IS evidence.)