Frontline: Secrets of the Vatican

  • Thread starter Thread starter on_the_hill
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
This is a fair and balanced review of the program, pointing out the truths, half-truths, falsehoods, and agenda of the report. Thanks for sharing the link.
That’s good to hear. I wasn’t sure as I didn’t see the program. :o
I thought that was a very good, well crafted review. Something that jumped out at me was the use of the term “delicious opportunity” in reference to the ammunition handed to enemies of the Church on a silver platter by those who perpetrated and covered up hideous crimes against children and adolescents. We have those evildoers to thank for a large part of the gleeful criticism of “the Church” that we have had to endure for years now.
Indeed. We will probably be hearing criticism for centuries. People still allude to things like the Crusades and the Inquisition in arguments against the Church. And those are both far more defensible than child abuse.

It really highlights for me the social consequences of sin. The sins of those perpetrators will likely remain a stumbling block for people to accept the faith for as long as the world keeps on spinning.
 
I have an extremely low opinion of television, and I haven’t watched in years.

I’ve got the documentary on now, but I rather doubt I will have enough interest to finish.

Besides, my feet hurt and I’m thinking of going back to bed. I took a couple of the pain pills my doctor prescribed for me, but they haven’t kicked in yet. 😦
 
Watched.

I get tired of the abuse scandals - over and over again. How many times can they hop on this. So this didn’t bother me but I wonder about a young viewing audience.

This is PBS - very little comes out that isn’t liberal propaganda so I didn’t expect much.

I was taken back by the butler being so-called falsely accused - hadn’t heard that before.
I was also taken back by report that came back to the pope on February 12th or so about the internal problem with cardinals giving out secrets(not the butler) and then Pope Benedicts resigning a few weeks later.

The follow-up show on my PBS was a show about slavery and how the religious were in favor of it.
 
Watched it. Irresponsible to show Maciel’s son explaining what happened …poor man and shame on the producers for not caring about people being upset or about having memories be triggered by it. Not surprised at Tom Doyle being in the video, and astonished that the reporters Jason Berry and Micken would paint Pope Benedict a fool.

Another nice review, in addition to those mentioned below by others, is pewsandcassocks.net/2014/03/02/irresponsible-frontline-catholic-church-show/

They each make different points that are very good. I worry about people who watch this.
 
It begins:

Fair and balanced?
The beginning grabs the reader’s attention, as it should, and is this statement so incorrect? Nonetheless, the review admits to the wrongdoing promulgated by the Church (or its clergy) but also goes on to point out the half-truths as well as the falsehoods and possible agenda implicit in the program. I would say the article is fair and balanced.
 
I’m a journalist, too, and I’m glad to hear your husband is a journalist and you both see the validity within this *Frontline *report.

Many people often blame the “horrible media” when a news special like this airs, for having an anti-Catholic “agenda”.

But although imperfect, the media is not the right place to direct the blame here.

.
The clerical sex abuse scandal has been the single most disturbing issue my husband has had to deal with in his nearly 40 years as a broadcast journalist and journalism instructor (at a Catholic college.) He has emceed numerous Catholic awards banquets, served as a reader for diocesan celebrations, been involved in all sorts of events at our Catholic schools and made sure that Catholic and pro-life news was not ignored.

We are in a diocese that has had several high-profile cases of abuse of young men/boys and a couple of cases of improper relationships with female parishioners. These have been, thankfully, few and far between to the best of our knowledge.

At least two of the perpetrators were very well-known priests, one of them now deceased. There was the all-too-common stone-walling, obfuscation and incredulity (“but Fr. X was such a good liturgist”!!!) The way that the diocesan lawyers went after several women who accused one popular young priest of improper sexual advances was truly appalling and disheartening; he finally admitted his actions in a deposition, but the women had been so beaten down by the lawyers that they finally gave up (one after the lawyer threatened to put her psychologically fragile son on the stand.) That priest is now pastor of a large parish and has been named a “vicar”, but not before poisoning the well against my husband, who had aggressively pursued the story of his sexual impropriety. We discovered that there are faithful Catholics who are so appalled and horrified at the thought of a priest whom they know and love committing such transgressions that they simply cannot bring themselves to believe it. My husband was “disinvited” from several of the events he had emceed for years, no longer asked to participate in diocesan celebrations, etc. Fortunately, his longevity, community service and popularity in this TV market work in his favor, and while he still asks tough questions, he has a good working relationship with the new bishop here.

We’ve met and my husband communicates with some regularity with Jason Berry, of the Frontline documenter who is responsible for some of the most important research and journalism done on this subject. He is a dedicated journalist and Catholic of great integrity, who knows, as does my husband, that without persistent journalists, the climate would still be far more conducive to the perpetrators of these unconscionable crimes against young people than it now is.
 
Don’t any of you have concern about the details of the rapes being explained in public in the Frontline program?

Why does “transparency” require such things? I do not need to know all of this to understand the gravity of the abuse issue.

My daughter is in college now, and rape is an issue in colleges as well. There is discussion about how the school proliferates that type of culture and what to do about it, and it is open discussion. When I say open, I mean in the online student newspaper. However when things get graphic about what happened or can happen, etc., there is a trigger warning.

There are some false statements made in the program, like the Catholic Church being the worst offender statistically. Just saying this does not change what happened, but there are false statements made.

I am amazed that none of you are understanding this.
 
Don’t any of you have concern about the details of the rapes being explained in public in the Frontline program?

Why does “transparency” require such things? I do not need to know all of this to understand the gravity of the abuse issue.

My daughter is in college now, and rape is an issue in colleges as well. There is discussion about how the school proliferates that type of culture and what to do about it, and it is open discussion. When I say open, I mean in the online student newspaper. However when things get graphic about what happened or can happen, etc., there is a trigger warning.

There are some false statements made in the program, like the Catholic Church being the worst offender statistically. Just saying this does not change what happened, but there are false statements made.

I am amazed that none of you are understanding this.
Frankly, if the victims of such terrible abuse want to describe what happened, and if it is any way cathartic for them, I think they have every right to. Perhaps only that will bring home to some of us the depths of depravity to which some clerics sank.

What amazes me is when people don’t grasp that the time for defensiveness is way past.
 
I see both sides.

On hand, it’s not a polite topic and should be discussed gingerly and prudentially. Graphic details are not edifying to sensitive listeners. The con to this is that treating sexual abuse in this way marginalizes the victim and paints the listener as unsympathetic at best or a cover up artist at worst.

On the other hand, talking about the scandal, especially from the POV of the victim can be cathartic. It can humanize these victims to authorities, as opposed to names on a page (coming from Frontline). Sadly, the wheels had to get pretty squeaky before the internal system of dealing with such cases was revamped. The con to this is that there is a time, place, and audience for this. Traumatized people are so hurt and angry that they may feel justified in overlooking this.

**Neither system of thought alone can be fully just and fully merciful to both the Church and the victims. **

When does the victim in telling his or her story have the right to make anyone uncomfortable in telling and retelling? When it facilitates consistently keeping preventative measures in place, working with both the Church officials in tandem with local law enforcement, and helping victims to become survivors. That’s all we can do.
 
Don’t any of you have concern about the details of the rapes being explained in public in the Frontline program?

Why does “transparency” require such things? I do not need to know all of this to understand the gravity of the abuse issue.

My daughter is in college now, and rape is an issue in colleges as well. There is discussion about how the school proliferates that type of culture and what to do about it, and it is open discussion. When I say open, I mean in the online student newspaper. However when things get graphic about what happened or can happen, etc., there is a trigger warning.

There are some false statements made in the program, like the Catholic Church being the worst offender statistically. Just saying this does not change what happened, but there are false statements made.

I am amazed that none of you are understanding this.
I did not find the show shocking. Because of living in the Northeast where many of the first cases had come to light and seeing almost a whole year of newspaper articles, pages and pages, of cases, this program seemed small in comparison.

I was more taken back by the fact they claimed the butler was framed. I don’t believe that. They did touch on the gay group in the Vatican which also had been in the news so that didn’t shock me.

This is PBS. Hopefully most people know it is a liberal TV station.

Now if we could only get to the real scandal, which is the public school teachers and their exploits which never seem to get much press at all.
 
I did not find the show shocking. Because of living in the Northeast where many of the first cases had come to light and seeing almost a whole year of newspaper articles, pages and pages, of cases, this program seemed small in comparison.

I was more taken back by the fact they claimed the butler was framed. I don’t believe that. They did touch on the gay group in the Vatican which also had been in the news so that didn’t shock me.

This is PBS. Hopefully most people know it is a liberal TV station.

Now if we could only get to the real scandal, which is the public school teachers and their exploits which never seem to get much press at all.
I saw a sensational movie called The Magdalene Girls, and that made me interested in the topic. I read everything I could. I learned the the Anglican church as well as the crown ran industrial schools with no less the claims against the orders and the Church. But thosestate and Protestant organizations are now defunct, leaving the victims to no recourse.

I’m not finger pointing. I’m saying that the Church eternal is still here and chugging along after a failed suicidal experiment that meant to help and instead empowered irrational and sick people.

At least the Church has stops in place from lessons learned. Secular and other religious organizations? Not so much.
 
I saw a sensational movie called The Magdalene Girls, and that made me interested in the topic. I read everything I could. I learned the the Anglican church as well as the crown ran industrial schools with no less the claims against the orders and the Church. But thosestate and Protestant organizations are now defunct, leaving the victims to no recourse.

I’m not finger pointing. I’m saying that the Church eternal is still here and chugging along after a failed suicidal experiment that meant to help and instead empowered irrational and sick people.

At least the Church has stops in place from lessons learned. Secular and other religious organizations? Not so much.
I have heard of the book and movie but have not seen. So now the state and Protestant organizations are defunct, how did that happen?

I agree that the lessons have been learned and hopefully these shows will only be shown occasionally to refresh everyone’s memory. It’s important we don’t forget as I don’t want to ever see again in print what we saw for a whole year in the northeast. You are right. The Church is dealing with it and there is nothing more that they can do.
 
I have heard of the book and movie but have not seen. So now the state and Protestant organizations are defunct, how did that happen?

I agree that the lessons have been learned and hopefully these shows will only be shown occasionally to refresh everyone’s memory. It’s important we don’t forget as I don’t want to ever see again in print what we saw for a whole year in the northeast. You are right. The Church is dealing with it and there is nothing more that they can do.
First, I meant to write “social experiment,” not “suicidal experiment.” I didn’t catch that autocorrect.

I wouldn’t recommend the movie unless you’re willing to follow up with research. It took the most sensational reports from different women’s stories over a period of time and made a 90 min plot line. The shock factor is effective only as far as the watcher investigates to put the events into context.

The Crown and the English churches simply ran out of money to fund these programs that were not rehabilitative or welfare to work programs. Shrub technology began to replace labor there, was less of a need for these cash cows patterned after work houses. “Suffer the Little Children: The Inside Story of Ireland’s Industrial Schools” provided facts and figures from the records. It’s not a novel like “Do Penance or Perish.”

Until you get the book, Google the Industrial School Act and begin to compare institutionalized abuse sanctioned by an entire kingdom and what you find perpetrated by the Church was not any better,but not nearly as widespread.
 
First, I meant to write “social experiment,” not “suicidal experiment.” I didn’t catch that autocorrect.

I wouldn’t recommend the movie unless you’re willing to follow up with research. It took the most sensational reports from different women’s stories over a period of time and made a 90 min plot line. The shock factor is effective only as far as the watcher investigates to put the events into context.

The Crown and the English churches simply ran out of money to fund these programs that were not rehabilitative or welfare to work programs. Shrub technology began to replace labor there, was less of a need for these cash cows patterned after work houses. “Suffer the Little Children: The Inside Story of Ireland’s Industrial Schools” provided facts and figures from the records. It’s not a novel like “Do Penance or Perish.”

Until you get the book, Google the Industrial School Act and begin to compare institutionalized abuse sanctioned by an entire kingdom and what you find perpetrated by the Church was not any better,but not nearly as widespread.
I am not sure I want to read the book. Wikipedia quotes about 5000 children in these institutionalized schools which seems like a small number.Is the book just about Irish Catholics and abuse again:rolleyes: or is it about the UK and the economy at the times. We have Dickens and he paints a pretty good picture of the industrial revolution and hard times.
 
I am not sure I want to read the book. Is it just about Irish Catholics again or is it about the UK and the economy at the times. We have Dickens and he paints a pretty good picture of the industrial revolution and hard times.
It’s not anti Catholic. It’s about the, economic need that led to religious institutions that wanted to tender service to the nation…both Catholic and Protestant.

Thing is: one cannot get remuneration from a long dead organization sponsored by the Crown. But there is always a Catholic ATM. 😉
 
It’s not anti Catholic. It’s about the, economic need that led to religious institutions that wanted to tender service to the nation…both Catholic and Protestant.

Thing is: one cannot get remuneration from a long dead organization sponsored by the Crown. But there is always a Catholic ATM. 😉
The 2002 movie is about 30,000 women that were in these laundry institutes in Ireland, a catholic nation and it doesn’t sound like they were treated too well according to the summaries online so I will pass. I just read reviews.

I think it is another anti-catholic movie.

Here is a great article(found on forums) on how they raise the numbers on both the Magdalene Laundries and the sex abuse victims.

blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/brendanoneill2/100202781/catholic-bashers-have-embellished-the-truth-about-abuse-in-catholic-institutions-its-time-to-put-the-record-straight/
 
My husband and I watched this recent Frontline documentary online at their website last week. It was rather disturbing to hear some of the negative activity going on in and around the Vatican. Most of those sordid reports were not known to us either.
We both agreed that it is important to pray regularly for Pope Francis daily.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top