If you’re referring to the post preceding your “N/a”, it was applicable due to someone else beforehand bringing up not letting abuse being a hurdle to joining the Church because it is very much over reported, and how statistically kids are safer with Catholic priests than just about any other group of people. A third poster James responded to my response to that poster and then I responded to James. Just responding to things previously posted.
I read about it, not in the *New York Times*, but in an ultra-conservative area newspaper published by a prominent Catholic family. This continuing effort to indict the *Times*, by the way, is foolish and self-defeating. Whatever its faults, it remains the greatest paper in the USA and its readers know that. Just because it reports the news also doesn't mean that it takes a position on every issue raised by these news stories. Then, too, there is a tendency to blame the *Times* when a columnist writes something. We should treasure our freedom of the press.
Key figures in the hierarchy apparently decided years ago that they would try their best to keep the lid on the sexual predatory behavior of priests. This was an unwise decision. It has made many people, Catholics and non-Catholics, resent the fact that the Church felt that criminal priests should be dealt with by the Church rather than - as other criminals - by civil authorities. In CT the State Police Chaplain rushed off to some island in the Caribbean to escape prosecution. Tragic story. It has alienated millions and caused even the most faithful to question the wisdom of many church leaders.
As for the Pope, it isn't clear yet whether the Vatican got involved in all this early on. I was shocked, however, that Cardinal Law, who had done such a poor job on this issue when leading the Church in the Boston area, was given a top position in Rome by the Pope. Makes you wonder.We don’t know what the document that the Irish bishops had drafted says. If, for example, it says that a priest that is suspected of abuse is to immediately have all his faculties permanently revoked and he turns to Rome who says “Hey, the Irish bishops overstepped their authority and violated canon law in doing this” the bishops would have egg on their faces. That’s all the document says, “Don’t do anything that violates canon law, because if you do and the priest appeals to us we’ll have to overrule you and that could be embarrassing.” It doesn’t say “Don’t report abusing priests to the police.”I think the thing people are seeing isn’t the Report of the Irish Catholic Bishops’ Advisory Committee on Child Sexual Abuse by Priests and Religious, rather, the Vatican’s 1997 response to it which seems to indicate that the Irish Committee’s report was seen as “If such procedures were to be followed by the Bishops and there were cases of eventual hierarchical recourse lodged at the Holy See,*** the results could be highly embarrassing ***and detrimental to those same Diocesan authorities” — this seems to be indicative of someone trying to cover their collective rear ends rather than helping the victims of the abuse and bringing the criminal priests to justice. This 1997 document needs to be read for what it says rather than what we Catholics ‘interpret’ it have to have hopefully meant.
catholicbishops.ie/publications/62-safeguarding/381-child-sexual-abuse-framework-for-a-church-response ---- The Irish Bishops’ draft.We don’t know what the document that the Irish bishops had drafted says. If, for example, it says that a priest that is suspected of abuse is to immediately have all his faculties permanently revoked and he turns to Rome who says “Hey, the Irish bishops overstepped their authority and violated canon law in doing this” the bishops would have egg on their faces. That’s all the document says, “Don’t do anything that violates canon law, because if you do and the priest appeals to us we’ll have to overrule you and that could be embarrassing.” It doesn’t say “Don’t report abusing priests to the police.”
If I see a crime being committed or if I am suspicious of a crime, I will call the police and give them the details so that they can investigate. They have the authority and the expertise to deal with the question of suspected criminal activity. Since bishops are not trained as professionals in detecting whether or not a crime has been committed, it seems appropriate that all suspicious criminal activity should be reported to the police immediately and that nothing should be covered up or withheld from the police.catholicbishops.ie/publications/62-safeguarding/381-child-sexual-abuse-framework-for-a-church-response ---- The Irish Bishops’ draft.
graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/world/Ireland-Catholic-Abuse.pdf — the 1997 letter to the Irish Bishops in response.
The problem I have is this paragraph: “If such procedures were to be followed by the Bishops and there were cases of eventual hierarchical recourse lodged at the Holy See,*** the results could be highly embarrassing **and detrimental to those same Diocesan authorities" — this isn’t about anything other than avoiding a 'highly embarrassing” situation. That is the statement in the reply that is not defensible.
*highlights are mine
Without a doubt, looking at Church history you can’t help but see many, many cases of high ranking Catholics do bad things for various reasons (power, fear, wealth, pleasure, etc.). I am Catholic because my best understanding of Early Church fathers and scripture points to the Catholic Church having the best representation of truth Jesus left us, especially in the essential type items. Having said that, the biggest thing that stings me on a somewhat regular basis is “You will know them by their fruit” and unfortunately our faithful and leaders have left a lot to be desire in that case often.I think the hurdle some have difficulty overcoming has nothing to do with statistics of abuse vs other groups. This seems an argument Catholics like to present but I believe has little bearing on the issue. Here’s why. As awful any abuse by a priest may be, any cover up by bishops, who the Church believes to be Apostolic successors, is even worse to some. We are not talking about just any group. We are talking about a church interpreting itself to be the one true Church of Christ. Yes I know all about how bishops sin too and we are to do as they say not as they do. But I think some have more difficulty because a church’s Apostolic successors have covered up child abuse. They themselves know better than to cover up abuse. So they may see Apostolic successors, who preach the sanctity of life, as should have knowing better than that as well.
John L Allen’s analysis: ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/vatican-letter-abuse-smoking-gunIt seems clear to me that the Church was trying to do what other groups do. They were trying to keep the sexual abuse hidden, paying off victims to keep them quiet, afraid of how the reputation of the Church would be impacted if the truth became known. This was a decision by men in high Church positions who were doing their best to protect the image of the Church. It may be understandable, but it was a very unwise decision and this latest revelation from Ireland is just another hit.
Code:I read about it, not in the *New York Times*, but in an ultra-conservative area newspaper published by a prominent Catholic family. This continuing effort to indict the *Times*, by the way, is foolish and self-defeating. Whatever its faults, it remains the greatest paper in the USA and its readers know that. Just because it reports the news also doesn't mean that it takes a position on every issue raised by these news stories. Then, too, there is a tendency to blame the *Times* when a columnist writes something. We should treasure our freedom of the press. Key figures in the hierarchy apparently decided years ago that they would try their best to keep the lid on the sexual predatory behavior of priests. This was an unwise decision. It has made many people, Catholics and non-Catholics, resent the fact that the Church felt that criminal priests should be dealt with by the Church rather than - as other criminals - by civil authorities. In CT the State Police Chaplain rushed off to some island in the Caribbean to escape prosecution. Tragic story. It has alienated millions and caused even the most faithful to question the wisdom of many church leaders. As for the Pope, it isn't clear yet whether the Vatican got involved in all this early on. I was shocked, however, that Cardinal Law, who had done such a poor job on this issue when leading the Church in the Boston area, was given a top position in Rome by the Pope. Makes you wonder.
Thank you. That makes things much clearer.John L Allen’s analysis: ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/vatican-letter-abuse-smoking-gun
You can’t put the two highlighted portions together without the non-highlighted portion because the sense is not the same.catholicbishops.ie/publications/62-safeguarding/381-child-sexual-abuse-framework-for-a-church-response ---- The Irish Bishops’ draft.
graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/world/Ireland-Catholic-Abuse.pdf — the 1997 letter to the Irish Bishops in response.
The problem I have is this paragraph: “If such procedures were to be followed by the Bishops and there were cases of eventual hierarchical recourse lodged at the Holy See,*** the results could be highly embarrassing **and detrimental to those same Diocesan authorities" — this isn’t about anything other than avoiding a 'highly embarrassing” situation. That is the statement in the reply that is not defensible.
*highlights are mine
What sort of family member gives another family grief about their faith every week? It seems to me that he is protesting and trying to disprove your faith waaay too much…something else at work there.From CBC News:
A newly revealed 1997 letter from the Vatican warned Ireland’s Catholic bishops not to report all suspected child-abuse cases to police — a disclosure with the potential to fuel more lawsuits worldwide against the Vatican, which has long denied any involvement in coverups.
The letter, obtained by Irish broadcasters RTE and provided to The Associated Press, documents the Vatican’s rejection of an Irish church initiative to begin helping police identify pedophile priests.
Read more: cbc.ca/world/story/2011/01/18/vativan-letter-sex-abuse-ireland.html#socialcomments#ixzz1BPBhgY4W
Sent to me by my atheist brother-in-law with glee. I’m sure he’s awaiting my response on how I’ll rationalize holding on to my beliefs. This occurs week after week with him.
Here’s his email quote to me:
it appears The Ratz was complicit and is a liar.
Anyone wanna help me out with this?
emp
I think this is what makes me hang on. This may sound quaint and unrealistic to some, but there have been so many saints who have lived during times of horrible corruption in the Church and have been able to see beyond it, to Christ. Some spoke out against the corruption. Some did not. All remained faithful.To suit us, the ideal high priest would have to be holy, innocent and uncontaminated, beyond the influence of sinners, and raised up above the heavens; one who would not need to offer sacrifices every day, as the other high priests do for their own sins and then for those of the people, because he has done this once and for all by offering himself. The Law appoints high priests who are men subject to weakness; but the promise on oath, which came after the Law, appointed the Son who is made perfect for ever.
Thank you for shedding light on the circumstances surrounding “The Letter”. The bishops who worked towards issuing new safety guidelines and mandatory reporting of abuse cases to civil authorities (for the sake of the children) in the early 1991’s should be commended. For their efforts to be overturned by the Congregation of the Clergy in Rome is reprehensible. My question is - has anything changed? Is it mandatory now for alleged abuse from clergy within the church to be investigated by civil authorities (police)?The letter is genuine & was supposedly leaked by a bishop to RTE - state broadcasting service of Ireland. It is not anti-catholic but an attempt show us here in Ireland what actually was going on in the background. You must remember that over the past few years we have had 3 major reports into child abuse in Catholic environments here in Ireland. 1 was into institutional abuse & the other 2 were abuse in catholic dioceses. If anyone has the time look up Murphy report. This issue is real & hurts everyone here in Dublin from the Archbishop down to weekly massgoers. We all felt let down by the church leaders which led to 2 bishops resigning and calls for others to go. The Pope’s letter to Irish Catholics puts the blame on our bishops and we are currently undergoing a visitation of 3 cardinals on the issue. What the program shows us is that the Irish bishops did try to do something in the early 1990s issuing new safety guidelines & mandatory reporting of abuse cases to civil authorities. This was overturned by the Congregation of the Clergy in Rome, in that it’s view was that the bishops’ responsibility in reported cases of child abuse was primarily to the priest & not the child. The outcome of this was the Cardinal Archbishop of Dublin personally pleading with the Pope to laicise a repeat offender see rte.ie/player/#v=1089205