How do we respond to the "sex abuse scandal"?

[Tybourne]

This just in from the Toronto Star:

CAVEAT- If your faith is being sorely tested by this scandal, it might be better to skip this post. I don’t want to be the cause of anyone’s faith weakening. More disturbing revelations follow.

My **emphases **and comments, Fr Z style.

Church letter shows bishops and Vatican were aware of abuse complaints

By 1993, the seriousness of child sexual abuse allegations against a Pembroke priest who had been elevated to the Vatican was such that Cardinal Aloysius Ambrozic wouldn’t let him near his Toronto diocese.

But not serious enough for the then-archbishop of Toronto, five fellow Ontario bishops and the Vatican’s representative in Ottawa to go to police. [However, note that the victims appear not to have wanted a prosecution]

Instead, as laid out in a 1993 letter filed in a sex abuse court case, former Pembroke bishop Joseph Windle warned the Vatican that promoting Bernard Prince any higher might trigger a growing number of abuse victims to go public or to the police, and prove “extremely embarrassing.” could be really bad if it gets out" rather than, “This is really bad”]
…

The letter came a year after a report recommended bishops should immediately contact police about claims of child sexual abuse by priests… [But, please see my comments below.]…

The statement said that** the diocese took the initiative in contacting the original victim in October 1990 “in response to rumors that began circulating early in 1990. In accordance with protocol the victim was encouraged to refer the allegations to the civil authorities and offered support and encouragement. His decision at the time was not to do so.”** [Should this decision not have been respected?]

Neil MacCarthy, a spokesperson for the Archdiocese of Toronto, said Cardinal Ambrozic, who retired in 2006, would not comment on the letter because of his poor health. But he did say the bishops were acting within church and civil rules. **“The onus is not on a bishop to launch a criminal complaint on your behalf,” **said MacCarthy.[Fair point?]

Reached at his home in Rome, the papal nuncio who received the letter about Prince did not want to speak about it.

“I don’t remember anything and I don’t permit that we continue with this conversation,” [Note the insinuated mockery of Curis’s poor grasp of English. Still, a bad response.]said Archbishop Carlo Curis. Then he hung up.

London [Ontario]lawyer Robert Talach said the document surfaced as part of a civil suit. It was entered as an exhibit in the case of one of 14 clients who are suing, or have sued, the Pembroke diocese.

“To be balanced, the first thing I say is, good for you, Cardinal Ambrozic, for refusing to let this man return to your jurisdiction,” said Talach.

And then: “There should be a mandatory requirement, in this country, that the church comes forward as soon as they are aware of an abuser and involve secular authorities,[Even if the victim doesn’t want that? Seems an invasion of privacy.] because they have utterly failed over the decades, frankly, to deal with it effectively internally. They just can’t be trusted. They’ve lost that credibility.”
…

But Windle said he told Sanchez that he “would not object to him being given another chance [Provided he were placed in a capacity where his contact with children would be strictly limited and/or closely overseen?]since it would remove him from the Canadian scene.”

Windle opens the 1993 letter to the Papal envoy by saying, “In conscience, and before God, I must inform your Excellency that I am adamantly opposed to Fr. Prince receiving any Papal Honour or ever being promoted to the Episcopate …

“Were he to be honoured in any way it could easily trigger a reaction among the victim(s), or others who are aware of his previous conduct, and this would prove extremely embarrassing both to the Holy See and to the Diocese of Pembroke, not to mention the possibility of criminal charges being laid and a civil suit ensuing,” Windle wrote.[Again, the wrong priorities]

Prince, now defrocked, was at the time serving in Rome and potentially in line to be promoted or honoured.

“One redeeming factor,” Windle noted, “is that it would appear that the victims involved are of Polish descent and their respect for the priesthood and the Church has made them refrain from making these allegations public or laying a criminal charge against a priest.” [This is terrible.]

…

Windle retired three months after writing the letter. He died in 1997 at the age of 80.

In 1992, a year before the letter was written, a report by a committee of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops entitled “From Pain to Hope” made 50 recommendations, including one that bishops should contact police if allegations of sexual abuse involve minors.[Again, would this be even if those alleging abuse didn’t want to go down the legal route?]

…
A police investigation into Prince began in 2005. Prince pleaded guilty in 2008 to 12 charges of indecent or sexual assault and found guilty on a charge of indecent assault. He is currently in jail. [Phew. May God have mercy on him (and I mean that).]

 

[twb1621]

You are the one who assumes that means everybody. I know some great priests and nuns who have had no party to the problem, so universal blame is not my contention.
Peace

I have raised the fact that you have been generalizing your blame on “the Catholic Church” throughout this discussion. Now you have run down a list of popes as though you have first hand knowledge of all of them as well. I am thankful that you have made it clear you do not blame the entire Catholic Church for this as I have noted in your statement text in red above. But those that you believe righteous, do you think they are the only ones? They had religious instructors and professors, mentors, guidance counselors, superiors and so on, of the Catholic Church and I am sure they knew many more than you can imagine who were just as devoted. Maybe 3 or 4% corruption leaves 96 or 97% devoted to there ministry.
It is not reasonable to expect any man, pope or otherwise to be Jesus, even Jesus did not expect that. Scripture clearly points out through the prophesies of Christ Himself there would be (not maybe) corruption within His Church at times and to think it shouldn’t occur even though He warned of it is denial. It is an abomination and heart breaking and shameful but as long as humans are involved, the chances for corruption are real. Your expectations are the same as mine and most every other Catholic but that doesn’t make them realistic or feasible unfortunately. And how many cases were you present during to know what was discussed between parties in addition to ALL that was recorded. How many popes are you going to hold responsible without knowing what they knew or didn’t know.

Who would believe that all bishops report everything they should all the way to the Vatican? That is not realistic in private, public, commercial, government or any other hierarchies nor is it realistic in any faith, catholic or otherwise for two simple reasons; One, the responsibility is more frequently on them for their region and two because humans like to avoid having their superiors know all the screw ups that take place under their watch if they can bring resolution themselves which is where the initial “cover up” occurred in the Murphy case.

Not speaking of those who were legitimate victims righteously seeking justice, let me point out to you that no entity can pay someone a settlement who doesn’t want to be “paid off” but sincerely desires formal justice. If they accepted a settlement it was because that was acceptable to them and then who has the right to ridicule either party involved. That it not something anyone has the right to condemn the CC for unless one also condemns the victims or alleged victims also for accepting the settlements.
Notice how a person can accept a settlement in relation to any other event regardless of what that case may be and nothing is thought of it but because the CC offers a settlement and someone accepts it, it’s a “payoff” as though forced down their throat. And how many people do you think may have filed false accusations hanging on the coat tails of a real victim only to be paid off and received a settlement?

When it comes to seeking justice, whether through Church law or the judicial system, it most certainly is about the laws of man. If you believe it shouldn’t be about the laws of man, there would be no reason for taking them to court, retaining lawyers, settlements or anything else other than confessing, repenting and forgiving which would all be done privately just as you or I confess our own sins. You also wouldn’t be annoyed regarding the Church providing settlements and those who accepted them.

Your saying they do not want to protect the flock from the wolves is going back to a generalized inclusion of the Church again of which I am sure those who are devoted see you including them in your statements also. But read the following closely and repeat again what you expect from them as opposed to what you know is realistic.

Matthew CH24; 4 “And Jesus answering, said to them: Take heed that no man seduce you: 5 For many will come in my name saying, I am Christ: and they will seduce many. 6 And you shall hear of wars and rumors of wars. See that ye be not troubled. For these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet. 7 For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom; and there shall be pestilences, and famines, and earthquakes in places: 8 Now all these are the beginnings of sorrows. 9 Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall put you to death: and you shall be hated by all nations for my name’s sake. 10 And then shall many be scandalized: and shall betray one another: and shall hate one another. 11 And many false prophets shall rise, and shall seduce many. 12 And because iniquity hath abounded, the charity of many shall grow cold. 13 But he that shall persevere to the end, he shall be saved.”

Acts Ch20; 28 “Take heed to yourselves, and to the whole flock, wherein the Holy Ghost hath placed you bishops, to rule the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. 29 I know that, after my departure, ravening wolves will enter in among you, not sparing the flock. 30And of your own selves shall arise men speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.”

I know it must be hard to put aside the personal resentment you have. We need a lot of prayers for sure.

 

[peary]

We pray - we pray for holy priests that they may fulfill their duties; we pray for the abused, that they may find peace in their lives.

 

[twb1621]

On considering many of the comments raised by ourselves (Catholics) throughout this thread, a great deal of the condemnation is placed against the Church’s concern to control scandal. Many seem to believe that the Church only wants to blow off serious accusations as though it does not consider them serious enough to deal with them appropriately. There is no question that in some of these cases they were handled improperly and attempts were made to avoid scandal, most often on the level of the bishopric. But what is scandal and what are the results?

Scandalized, the entire Church is held responsible for the horrific actions of the few corrupt. The media sensationalizes these cases because it GREATLY promotes the sale of their publications and raises the ratings of their viewership. But it also seriously exploits the victims who will have to go through the scrutiny of their own personal abuse on a national and international level. On the other hand, scandal places blame on every person of ministry within the Church and every organization that is sponsored by or under the guidance of the Catholic Church to the detriment of every effort through damaged reputations.

The results from scandal which have already been occurring include the targeting of clergy throughout the world because they are of the Church to a point of threat of physical harm and death, destruction of property, loss of faith in the entire institution by those already weak in their faith, and in many cases the refusal of many to financially support anything that is labeled Catholic as a means of “punishing” the Church (including the devote) for the actions of the few corrupt. These are only a few of the repercussions that come out of scandal. But the most saddening even greater than the suffering of the innocent devoted ministers of the faith in my opinion is the deprivation of those that many ministries in the Catholic Church aid in all ways throughout the world. The starving, the sick, the homeless, the victims of natural disasters such as earthquakes and tsunamis, children living in streets throughout the world, and orphans targeted for slavery and yes, sexual abuse on a scale of unrecognized magnitude in many impoverished regions, and of course those adults and children victimized by domestic abuse. These services, only to name a few, are all affected by scandal when the CC is scandalized and if you think these reasons are not justifiable concerns, talk to those who receive help through these ministries throughout the world.

So it would be negligent for the Church NOT to attempt to avoid scandal let alone sensationalism for the sake of higher ratings. Has the Church handled many of these cases improperly by our standards… yes. But are all the accusations founded on total fact to warrant such reactions as those coming about now? You decide. Then perhaps we can find the right way to spend our energy in a constructive manner to help in correcting the problem as truly faithful to the Church Jesus founded and asked our perseverance in our faith. I know many of us here are devoted, but for those who are more judgmental than devoted, let’s consider living our faith as a positive force in our Church.

 

[theinquisitive]

TOTALLY AGREE!!!
I keep reading in the local paper (in NJ) about more cases that were ‘mistakes’ - a local Bishop who didn’t know about a police report (Archdiocese of Newark where VOTF is not welcomed), transferred a Priest to Florida (for the warmer weather).
The millions of money keeps going to pay for these crimes, yet they blame everyone else. Our teachers will be judged more strickly as James 3:1 states and Romans 3:1-7 states that to resist the authorities is to resist God.
The little done to protect children only came out AFTER the laity, and the victims were finally were heard because of the media. I wonder if our leaders know about what the Bible says about disciplining and dealing with immoral people in the Church especially those who commit crimes. Those who cover-up as guilty as well. They should cooperate with all of the authorities and admit their wrongdoing and take responsibility.
Hush money to victims has been given out which seems to be a a crime in itself.
This is a conspiracy yet they blame others as anti-Catholics smearing the Church.
I’m a Catholic convert after attending a fundamental seminary and I’m conservative. I’m pro-life and don’t believe in gay marriage (whom have been accused of smearing the Catholic Church). These Church officials are our moral teachers. I’ve lost faith in the Catholic Church, but not Jesus. Our leaders need to stop the secrecy and promoting those who cover-up to higher places in the Vatican.
Jan Fredericks
Licensed Counselor
Chairman, Catholic Concern for Animals-USA

At last a comment (actually 2, the first very good one from COMMHKS ) that I have been praying for…
Yes!! stop passing the buck… Time to take up the responsibility for which they, Bishops,Cardenals,Popes,and others, vowed to do.
Responsibility for the spiritual/bodilly care of the followers of “Christ’s” Church,which does not only consist of clergy,but most of all the young and vunerable.
The only point in which I must disagree, is you loosing faith in the C.Church,the Church is not on trial,as much as the (spin doctors)Bishops and others will have us believe,it makes it easier to rally the “faithfull” in HER defense.
The criminals,and those who abated them are the ones who debased the Church through their actions,or in many cases, in-actions…
This will not just go away,and nor should it,for the sake of the Catholic Church,and all who believe in the true teaching of the"Church" given to us through Jesus Christ.
Instead of flying off on “State visits”,(JPII’s favorite passtime) the then Cardenal Ratzinger,now Pope should have taken more time to read the “pleading” letters asking for “his” help/advice, repeatedly sent to his office,and not leave those in the “capable” hands of his,advisors,as we have seen in the past they were/are not doing a very good job.That way he WOULD have known, which is after all his responsibility,to know what is going on in the Catholic world he oversees,or not???
I am so very much tired of all the “spin”, this is NOT a game,this involves crimes commited against fellow Catholics,are we expected to just pray,that the “church” will come through this crisis,caused by “idle chatter”… I think not!!
Enough words,action is needed,and soon.
Let us not allow,these crimials,to harm the “Body of Christ” in our name.
Forgive them?I can not,that,I must leave to the grace and wisdom of God.He alone knows their hearts.
PS. >>“Our leaders need to stop the secrecy and promoting those who cover-up to higher places in the Vatican.”<<
Yes I agree,the vatican seems to be coming a first class “retiring home” for embarassing clergymen. :tanning:

 

[theinquisitive]

You miss the biggest point. The church had more than enough information to head the problem off at the pass.

Any Pope could have taken any letter from any mother complaining about abuse and checked it out.----- Even checked it out behind the scenes as they did in the US where they were paying off victims well before the crisis became public in Boston.

All any of the Pius’s or J23 or P6 or JP2 or B16 had to do was make it clear that abuse would not be tolerated and subterfuge would not be tolerated.

But none had the courage to do what Jesus or His mother would do.

Its not about meeting the requirements of the laws of men, after all, the church is trying to use that ploy now to stifle discovery of what they knew and when they knew it.

Its about doing what Jesus told the apostles to do: be as shepherds to His sheep, but they unfortunately do not want to protect the flock from the wolves that have infiltrated the profession of the shepherds, instead they are willing to sacrifice a number of lambs and ewes to not bring shame upon the most gaudily dressed of the shepherds.

You keep saying I think everybody is guilty . I think the only guilty ones are those that abused and those that enabled abuse by either condoning abuse or using subterfuge to enable it.

You are the one who assumes that means everybody. I know some great priests and nuns who have had no party to the problem, so universal blame is not my contention.

Peace

Very well said,I am in total agreement…
As you,I do not hold “the whole C.Church” to be guilty,nor do I believe that any intelligent person would. As I said in my earlier comment,the “spin doctors” use that “angle” to rally the faithfull… It will not work in the long run.

 

[Boxie]

:thumbsup:Yes this is all true and predicted in scriptures, long ago, it also talks about the great falling away and this will happen also, because mens love will wax cold and charity will be scarce, and mental disoredrs will abound, take heed that no man decieve you. Just like you said We are told to hang on to what we believe is true, and let no man take your prize, and that prize is the kingdom of God! Hang on do not be moved, hold on to what you have learned and don’t let go because if you do satan will come in like a flood and steal all you have worked for and you will be left a desert.

 

[theinquisitive]

Paedophiles may,or may not be sick individuals,but they can only thrive in a climate of silence/secrecy,this climate is the sickness of which the C.Church is suffering.
BTW.I do not believe that all were/are Paedophiles,as the abuse continued past pubertry. (over the age of 18 in some cases).
We are not called to protect the culprits,but to defend the Faith,the victims,their bodily/spirtitual well being,also their right to justice.
Let us not forget that we,the every-day Catholics,are the C.Church (the Body of Christ),it is our duty as Christians,to demand that justice,in the name of Christ,be served.
As He looks down upon us all,He must be weeping.What a mess we are making of His “Church”.
Mud has a way of sticking unless it is thoughrily “washed off”,by absolute openess,all cards on the table,no more “secret documents” locked away for decades,what do WE have to hide???
The Statute of Litigation,is a “worldly” law,did not Christ Himself say “My Kingdom is not of this world”??? So, why cling on to that man-made law,the C.Church has the power (within it’s own Juristricion) to do-away with that Law… So.why not DO IT???

Christ’s followers would not have remained silent, nor,most definately would He.
Instead of trying to “silence” the media,let us demand,an end to the silence within the C.Church.It has survived far too long.
God Bless all, who are willing,and have the courage,to speak in defence of truth,defy the rule of silence…
The Church of Christ deserves no less.

 

[Godscre]

At last a comment (actually 2, the first very good one from COMMHKS ) that I have been praying for…
Yes!! stop passing the buck… Time to take up the responsibility for which they, Bishops,Cardenals,Popes,and others, vowed to do.
Responsibility for the spiritual/bodilly care of the followers of “Christ’s” Church,which does not only consist of clergy,but most of all the young and vunerable.
The only point in which I must disagree, is you loosing faith in the C.Church,the Church is not on trial,as much as the (spin doctors)Bishops and others will have us believe,it makes it easier to rally the “faithfull” in HER defense.
The criminals,and those who abated them are the ones who debased the Church through their actions,or in many cases, in-actions…
This will not just go away,and nor should it,for the sake of the Catholic Church,and all who believe in the true teaching of the"Church" given to us through Jesus Christ.
Instead of flying off on “State visits”,(JPII’s favorite passtime) the then Cardenal Ratzinger,now Pope should have taken more time to read the “pleading” letters asking for “his” help/advice, repeatedly sent to his office,and not leave those in the “capable” hands of his,advisors,as we have seen in the past they were/are not doing a very good job.That way he WOULD have known, which is after all his responsibility,to know what is going on in the Catholic world he oversees,or not???
I am so very much tired of all the “spin”, this is NOT a game,this involves crimes commited against fellow Catholics,are we expected to just pray,that the “church” will come through this crisis,caused by “idle chatter”… I think not!!
Enough words,action is needed,and soon.
Let us not allow,these crimials,to harm the “Body of Christ” in our name.
Forgive them?I can not,that,I must leave to the grace and wisdom of God.He alone knows their hearts.
PS. >>“Our leaders need to stop the secrecy and promoting those who cover-up to higher places in the Vatican.”<<
Yes I agree,the vatican seems to be coming a first class “retiring home” for embarassing clergymen. :tanning:

Thank you. I thought I would be kicked out of this thread. The vow of obedience to the Pope (or anyone else) should not supersede obedience to God. We are the Church and I’ll remain Catholic, but my trust in our moral leaders (I’m conservative by the way), is very low.
Thank you again!!! Very much appreciated. It would be nice to hear some accountability from those who did wrong for their own wrong doing (moral theology 101).

 

[portarica]

I have raised the fact that you have been generalizing your blame on “the Catholic Church” throughout this discussion. Now you have run down a list of popes as though you have first hand knowledge of all of them as well. I am thankful that you have made it clear you do not blame the entire Catholic Church for this as I have noted in your statement text in red above. But those that you believe righteous, do you think they are the only ones? They had religious instructors and professors, mentors, guidance counselors, superiors and so on, of the Catholic Church and I am sure they knew many more than you can imagine who were just as devoted. Maybe 3 or 4% corruption leaves 96 or 97% devoted to there ministry.
It is not reasonable to expect any man, pope or otherwise to be Jesus, even Jesus did not expect that. Scripture clearly points out through the prophesies of Christ Himself there would be (not maybe) corruption within His Church at times and to think it shouldn’t occur even though He warned of it is denial. It is an abomination and heart breaking and shameful but as long as humans are involved, the chances for corruption are real. Your expectations are the same as mine and most every other Catholic but that doesn’t make them realistic or feasible unfortunately. And how many cases were you present during to know what was discussed between parties in addition to ALL that was recorded. How many popes are you going to hold responsible without knowing what they knew or didn’t know.

Your saying they do not want to protect the flock from the wolves is going back to a generalized inclusion of the Church again of which I am sure those who are devoted see you including them in your statements also. But read the following closely and repeat again what you expect from them as opposed to what you know is realistic.

Matthew CH24; 4 “And Jesus answering, said to them: Take heed that no man seduce you: 5 For many will come in my name saying, I am Christ: and they will seduce many. 6 And you shall hear of wars and rumors of wars. See that ye be not troubled. For these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet. 7 For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom; and there shall be pestilences, and famines, and earthquakes in places: 8 Now all these are the beginnings of sorrows. 9 Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall put you to death: and you shall be hated by all nations for my name’s sake. 10 And then shall many be scandalized: and shall betray one another: and shall hate one another. 11 And many false prophets shall rise, and shall seduce many. 12 And because iniquity hath abounded, the charity of many shall grow cold. 13 But he that shall persevere to the end, he shall be saved.”

Acts Ch20; 28 “Take heed to yourselves, and to the whole flock, wherein the Holy Ghost hath placed you bishops, to rule the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. 29 I know that, after my departure, ravening wolves will enter in among you, not sparing the flock. 30And of your own selves shall arise men speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.”

I know it must be hard to put aside the personal resentment you have. We need a lot of prayers for sure.

First I don’t resent what Jesus taught and that is the essence of the church, so I don’t resent the church. Sort of like the view some take of homosexuality, I don’t hate the church I hate the sinners within the church.

I do however resent what those sinners do. As to generalizing, I have always noted the <5% of priests who have abused.

You however take the small amount that abused and apply it to the numbers of the bishops & leaders who have condoned abuse. What is the percentage of priests, bishops, cardinals and popes who had knowledge of the abuse issue from either victims, their parents or civil authorities and did not do all they could to eliminate or mitigate abuse?

I would postulate that a conservative number of the above class is less than 10%, there are few if any instances of any priests, bishops or above acting to personally mitigate abuse.

How many letters about the abuse of children were written by mothers to pastors, vicars, bishops, cardinals or popes? Because the standard that Jesus gave the shepherds was a much higher one than just reporting abuse to civil authorities, the leaders of our church chose not to meet even the low standards of civil authority regarding abuse, never mind the standards of Christ. I believe that the standards of Jesus would require that the church respond to a member of the congregation regarding abuse as surely as any other notice.

It is surely a more grave sin to ignore a mothers pleading regarding abuse than any other source of notice. But why follow Jesus’ teachings about the protection of the flock , when one can make use of secret agreements and statutes of limitations and subterfuge to preserve the perception of authority and credibility?

And that is the huge elephant in the room, not the question of why the church didn’t follow the rule of man, but why didn’t the church follow the teachings of Jesus ?

And while 4% of priests may have broken the laws of man and God, a horribly large percentage of the leadership of the church had; and continue to ignore the teachings of Jesus.

Peace

 

[tweetymom]

First I don’t resent what Jesus taught and that is the essence of the church, so I don’t resent the church. Sort of like the view some take of homosexuality, I don’t hate the church I hate the sinners within the church.

I do however resent what those sinners do. As to generalizing, I have always noted the <5% of priests who have abused.

You however take the small amount that abused and apply it to the numbers of the bishops & leaders who have condoned abuse. What is the percentage of priests, bishops, cardinals and popes who had knowledge of the abuse issue from either victims, their parents or civil authorities and did not do all they could to eliminate or mitigate abuse?

I would postulate that a conservative number of the above class is less than 10%, there are few if any instances of any priests, bishops or above acting to personally mitigate abuse.

How many letters about the abuse of children were written by mothers to pastors, vicars, bishops, cardinals or popes? Because the standard that Jesus gave the shepherds was a much higher one than just reporting abuse to civil authorities, the leaders of our church chose not to meet even the low standards of civil authority regarding abuse, never mind the standards of Christ. I believe that the standards of Jesus would require that the church respond to a member of the congregation regarding abuse as surely as any other notice.

It is surely a more grave sin to ignore a mothers pleading regarding abuse than any other source of notice. But why follow Jesus’ teachings about the protection of the flock , when one can make use of secret agreements and statutes of limitations and subterfuge to preserve the perception of authority and credibility?

And that is the huge elephant in the room, not the question of why the church didn’t follow the rule of man, but why didn’t the church follow the teachings of Jesus ?

And while 4% of priests may have broken the laws of man and God, a horribly large percentage of the leadership of the church had; and continue to ignore the teachings of Jesus.

Peace

Excellent post. Th abuse was bad, but the cover up worse. The CC is supposed to represent Jesus. I think that Jesus may be dismayed at His church. Stand up nd tell the truth and take your punches.

 

[MaryMagdala]

I can assure you (as much as this makes me positively SICK) that these kinds of abuses are everywhere. Protestant churches (I knew one molester personally, and the child as well), schools (rampant, and occurs almost every day), day cares, and just on the streets. In any place where there are children, there are going to be predators.

This is SOOO true.

And they are ALWAYS covered up … by whatever authority is involved, but as she said … the Church is a most handy scapegoat.

 

[twb1621]

Peace

First I don’t resent what Jesus taught and that is the essence of the church, so I don’t resent the church. Sort of like the view some take of homosexuality, I don’t hate the church I hate the sinners within the church.

I didn’t mean to seem I though you did, I understand that.

I do however resent what those sinners do. As to generalizing, I have always noted the <5% of priests who have abused.

Excellent as you should… as it should be.

You however take the small amount that abused and apply it to the numbers of the bishops & leaders who have condoned abuse. What is the percentage of priests, bishops, cardinals and popes who had knowledge of the abuse issue from either victims, their parents or civil authorities and did not do all they could to eliminate or mitigate abuse?

I would postulate that a conservative number of the above class is less than 10%, there are few if any instances of any priests, bishops or above acting to personally mitigate abuse.

In reading the documentation, very few (if any) truly knew how to properly approach such a crisis, each occurrence looked at as a major offense (which it was) with impending disastrous consequences. There were more that may have known than there were those with the authority to act on it which is obvious. But those numbers do not change the percentages enough to make much difference statistically. My point in regard to mentioning the statistics was to show how many innocent to their devotion are taking the blame and are threatened because of the guilty. I do know the statistics are not our concern, the victims are, and I know you feel the same in that regard. I already acknowledged my agreement in recognizing their poor handling based on what I have read to this point. But consider in the Murphy case according to the documents it was the initial bishop of the diocese who should have acted more decisively and formally upon it IMO. The succeeding bishop once he became aware did go to higher authority for guidance. As I am interested in your opinions here, from that point, who do you see as failing in the Murphy case once the second bishop became aware?

How many letters about the abuse of children were written by mothers to pastors, vicars, bishops, cardinals or popes?

I don’t know and neither do you but unless I am misunderstanding your point, you seem to be grouping unrelated incidents of different natures from all over the map into one scenario and this is not realistic when you consider there are tens of thousands of clergy and related devotees around the world serving among the faithful day in and day out. Some of the cases that you are including within those numbers WERE handled appropriately concluding with an acceptable outcome of the victim. You have to acknowledge that or you are just inflating what is bad enough on its own.

Because the standard that Jesus gave the shepherds was a much higher one than just reporting abuse to civil authorities, the leaders of our church chose not to meet even the low standards of civil authority regarding abuse, never mind the standards of Christ. I believe that the standards of Jesus would require that the church respond to a member of the congregation regarding abuse as surely as any other notice.

If you mean the church has the obligation to respond to the victim, absolutely, and in a responsible manner. I do not disagree at all with that. But the Church does not nor should it have the responsibility to blanketly inform the general parishioners or any others who are not involved. Such a responsibility if it existed would not end with clergy but would affect everyone who attends the sacrament of penance depending on what their sins might be.

It is surely a more grave sin to ignore a mothers pleading regarding abuse than any other source of notice. But why follow Jesus’ teachings about the protection of the flock , when one can make use of secret agreements and statutes of limitations and subterfuge to preserve the perception of authority and credibility?

Yes, sadly it occurred and it certainly is a more grave sin, one I would not want to stand before Jesus in judgment with. But keep that in mind. If something is kept confidential agreeably between both parties that is their right to keep and no one can criticize them for that. Neither you nor I have the right to be displeased with the agreed settlement of something we are not involved in. The statute of limitations was waived in the Murphy case and there was no outside pressure that brought that about. The statute of limitations was not decisive to the outcome.

continued…

 

[twb1621]

continued from previous post…

And that is the huge elephant in the room, not the question of why the church didn’t follow the rule of man, but why didn’t the church follow the teachings of Jesus ?

Certain members of the clergy violated the teachings of Christ in the sins they committed against the innocent. This is corruption. No matter what form of corruption were to have taken place, it certainly would have been against the teachings of Christ.

And while 4% of priests may have broken the laws of man and God, a horribly large percentage of the leadership of the church had; and continue to ignore the teachings of Jesus.

One is a horribly large percentage morally speaking, but no, it is not a horribly large percentage of the leadership. It just seems that way because it is repulsive to you and I and the rest of the faithful to imagine it could even happen let alone be mishandled as it was. But we need to realize that and stand for the Church of Christ, not those who betrayed her trust, and do what we can to make sure this ends with proper resolution in the service of God. That is what we should be doing. Not condemning, correcting as the body of the Church we are.

 

[Boxie]

TOTALLY AGREE!!!
I keep reading in the local paper (in NJ) about more cases that were ‘mistakes’ - a local Bishop who didn’t know about a police report (Archdiocese of Newark where VOTF is not welcomed), transferred a Priest to Florida (for the warmer weather).
The millions of money keeps going to pay for these crimes, yet they blame everyone else. Our teachers will be judged more strickly as James 3:1 states and Romans 3:1-7 states that to resist the authorities is to resist God.
The little done to protect children only came out AFTER the laity, and the victims were finally were heard because of the media. I wonder if our leaders know about what the Bible says about disciplining and dealing with immoral people in the Church especially those who commit crimes. Those who cover-up as guilty as well. They should cooperate with all of the authorities and admit their wrongdoing and take responsibility.
Hush money to victims has been given out which seems to be a a crime in itself.
This is a conspiracy yet they blame others as anti-Catholics smearing the Church.
I’m a Catholic convert after attending a fundamental seminary and I’m conservative. I’m pro-life and don’t believe in gay marriage (whom have been accused of smearing the Catholic Church). These Church officials are our moral teachers. I’ve lost faith in the Catholic Church, but not Jesus. Our leaders need to stop the secrecy and promoting those who cover-up to higher places in the Vatican.
Jan Fredericks
Licensed Counselor
Chairman, Catholic Concern for Animals-USA

:thumbsup:I to am discusted with the church, and the cover ups and the transfering of priests to other areas where no one knows them and it is not fair for other innocent children and parishoners to suffer more abuse from these bad priests, They are not above the law ,and if some thing was done way before this, the chuirch would have looked alot better and to new converts also. How can you bring people to the church if this is just dusted under the rug and how will you know who to trust in your church with your children?

 

[Boxie]

WOW, I just read all this thread and it came to me. If their are these priests living with other priests, you would think they would have spotted him or them, by now, and blew their cover for the church? How come no one told? They are all responsible are they not?

 

[theinquisitive]

---

Quote:
I can assure you (as much as this makes me positively SICK) that these kinds of abuses are everywhere. Protestant churches (I knew one molester personally, and the child as well), schools (rampant, and occurs almost every day), day cares, and just on the streets. In any place where there are children, there are going to be predators.​

This is SOOO true.

And they are ALWAYS covered up … by whatever authority is involved, but as she said … the Church is a most handy scapegoat.​

Mary Magala…
Sorry,but the above quote is not worthy of an adult… I hope it is taken out of context?

“Johny did it too mummy”<<<
I can not immagine any parent taking that as a valid excuse for misbehaving,much less for more serious matters. Should we hold our clergy/ Church leaders to a lesser standard than we would our children?
What happens in other communities is of course of interest to us,if we knew of abuse in schools,day cares,I would immagine we would report it and expect apropriate action to be taken. I am very sure I would,anyone else?
We can expect no less from our own Church authorities. Or not?
Why must we allways say “but this happens in many other places”? That,in my veiw, is not an adequate answer to this terrible problem we face.
The Pope is very concerned with the sexual practices of the married/unmarried members of the C.Church,forbiding contraceptives,in any form,even going so far as to state that condoms help to spread AIDS (foolish),much time is devoted to preaching on this subject,if only a 10th of that time was used in dealing with the matter at hand we would not be in such a state of denial…
And once again,the C.Church not being acused of being the only organization that has to deal with this,it is however,being made to answer for the inexcusable way in which it has handled the whole sordid affair.
Denials,counter denials;->>no one knew,anything,we thought he was cured,we did not know that he was still working with juvenilie members, I never recieved such letters,or, they can not be found<<
Well looks like quite a few did know quite a lot,and for a VERY long time…
documents.nytimes.com/the-document-trail-stephen-kiesle#document/p18

Oooooops! the media again:bigyikes: out looking for “scapegoats”…

 

[Tybourne]

Should we hold our clergy/ Church leaders to a lesser standard than we would our children?

No, we shouldn’t, of course. Fair comment- I agree that saying “it happens elsewhere” is a false consolation and seems like a cheap defence to those outside the Church.

At the same time, at the moment, this thread reads a bit like a competition to see who can get most worked up about the abuse scandal. The OP asks what we can do, not what the bishops or the Pope can do. I’ve seen few posts about what the *lay faithful * (which seems to describe most of the people posting here) can do.

It’s not a problem of secrecy. The Church has always operated with a veil of secrecy, ever since the time Our Lord told people to ‘tell no-one’ after he had healed them (the Messianic secret). Did the Church tell everyone about St Peter’s betrayal of Jesus or St Paul’s persecution of Christians? It *is *a problem of unchastity and it *is *a problem of power, of clericalism.

I would invoke the notion of reparation here. Remember that St Joseph and our Blessed Mother offered the sacrifice of two birds according to the Torah (Leviticus 12) when they went to present Jesus for his circumcision. One of these birds was a sin offering. Yet, as we know, Mary was without sin. So, why did she did she offer two birds? It was to show obedience to the Law before it was completed by Jesus. It was also in reparation, part of her spiritual offering that continues to this day, in union with the merits of Jesus’s Passover (His Passion, Death and Resurrection). So, what would reparation look like in the case of abuse? First, imagine what we would like the abusive priests to do (e.g. express sorrow/remorse, take on additional penances for their sins, do something to help the victims- what? Pray for the victims. Raise money for charities offering counselling and therapy to the victims of sexual abuse). *Then, we do those things ourselves, even though we are not the ones who have committed the sins. *We could even start a special lay association to do this, calling it something like the Confraternity of the Sacred Heart. Devotion to the Sacred Heart was traditionally linked to the idea of reparation.

Anyone interested?

 

[Godscre]

No, we shouldn’t, of course. Fair comment- I agree that saying “it happens elsewhere” is a false consolation and seems like a cheap defence to those outside the Church.

At the same time, at the moment, this thread reads a bit like a competition to see who can get most worked up about the abuse scandal. The OP asks what we can do, not what the bishops or the Pope can do. I’ve seen few posts about what the *lay faithful * (which seems to describe most of the people posting here) can do.

It’s not a problem of secrecy. The Church has always operated with a veil of secrecy, ever since the time Our Lord told people to ‘tell no-one’ after he had healed them (the Messianic secret). Did the Church tell everyone about St Peter’s betrayal of Jesus or St Paul’s persecution of Christians? It *is *a problem of unchastity and it *is *a problem of power, of clericalism.

I would invoke the notion of reparation here. Remember that St Joseph and our Blessed Mother offered the sacrifice of two birds according to the Torah (Leviticus 12) when they went to present Jesus for his circumcision. One of these birds was a sin offering. Yet, as we know, Mary was without sin. So, why did she did she offer two birds? It was to show obedience to the Law before it was completed by Jesus. It was also in reparation, part of her spiritual offering that continues to this day, in union with the merits of Jesus’s Passover (His Passion, Death and Resurrection). So, what would reparation look like in the case of abuse? First, imagine what we would like the abusive priests to do (e.g. express sorrow/remorse, take on additional penances for their sins, do something to help the victims- what? Pray for the victims. Raise money for charities offering counselling and therapy to the victims of sexual abuse). *Then, we do those things ourselves, even though we are not the ones who have committed the sins. *We could even start a special lay association to do this, calling it something like the Confraternity of the Sacred Heart. Devotion to the Sacred Heart was traditionally linked to the idea of reparation.

Anyone interested?

These are/were not merely ‘sins’ they were crimes and we as the Body of Christ need to expose these ‘crimes/sins’ for them to be Biblically dealt with (the Bible says alot about discipline and the civil law). Jesus told some of those he healed not to tell others (he wasn’t covering up crimes he committed), because everyone would want to find him for more healing. No comparison with why Jesus wanted miracles to not be broadcasted, verses hiding crimes.

 

[portarica]

This is SOOO true.

And they are ALWAYS covered up … by whatever authority is involved, but as she said … the Church is a most handy scapegoat.

The church is not a scapegoat.

Scapegoat:One that is made to bear the blame of others.

The church is not being blamed for the abuse of teachers or scout leaders or protestant ministers.

Calling the church a scapegoat , ironically is a way of making others a scapegoat for the church. Calling the church a scapegoat has only the purpose of deflecting the blame away from the church.

Peace