How to defend the Church against sex scandal issues

[JOE_OBERR]

RichSpidizzy:

.
There are many men raping small boys, this is true. I’m not talking about them. I am talking about men who are supposed to be leading people. I am talking about people who should know much better. I am talking about the educated men to whom we trust our children taking advantage of that trust. I am talking about these men whose actions have been covered up by the Catholic church for years. Because many people have done it, is by no means a justification.

The part I’m having trouble arguing against is the part in bold, where he complains that the Church covered up the scandal. How should I continue to defend the Church when I have trouble with that portion myself?

Just tell him the Catholic Church has not covered up one crime as the Church has never given any Catholic authority to cover up crimes, commit crimes or do anything contrary to any just law of any country. Just because a bishop covers up a crime or turns a blind eye to it does not mean the Church is responsible. Bishops have no authorization from the Church to ignore laws which may have mandated their reporting these crimes, or to throw out common sense when confronted with such situations. Bishops sin or violate just laws on their own personal authority, not under the authority of the Church as the Church authorizes no one to sin or commit evil. When a bishop or layman commits evil it is in spite of the Church not because of it as the Church teaches that everyone should do good and avoid evil. And shifting homosexual priests around after he (the bishop) knows the priest is committing crimes is certainly not doing good and preventing evil.

Because the President of the U.S. commits theft are we to assign blame to the Federal Government? Would we say the Federal Government steals because the President was personally guilty of theft of government property? Or if the President sells state secrets to a foreign government, do we say the government is guilty of treason? Of course not, since the President was acting against the law and not within the scope and authority of his office. When acting within the scope & authority of his office and he signs a treaty, then it can be said the government signed or executed a treaty with a foreign state. So when he acts within the scope & authority of his office those actions, whether signing new criminal statutes or spending bills, can be rightly ascribed to the Office of the President. But not when he does something outside of his official duties.

Same with the Church. When Mother Teresa does good in a public manner for all to see and in her official capacity with the Church, as she did with the poor for the last 50 or so years of her life, the good redounds to the credit of the Church as she is acting within the scope and authority of her Roman Catholic religious order. She gets credit in the sight of God and the world with honors or whatever, but so does the Church as it can be said “the Church is assisting the poor in Calcutta” because the Missionaries of Charity are acting in an official capacity within the Church.

If the bishops would obey Church teachings, like we all should, there would be no sexual abuse of children, no drug abuse, no murder, no theft and the jails would close as the teachings God gives us through His Church lead to peace and tranquility in society.

 

[Penny_Plain]

RichSpidizzy:

Oh no, I’m not trying to defend the Church’s protection/hiding of the offenders, I’m just trying to prevent the stereotype from forming that the Church is permanently wrong and evil because of it.

The only thing that will cure that is time.

The Church must be serious about identifying and punishing offenders. It must be serious about doing what it can to make the victims whole, even if the victims are angry with the Church. It must act with honesty and transparency for a long, long time.

I do not think there is anything you can say to justify the actions of Cardinal Law or some of the other bishops. They looked the other way while men under their orders preyed on the very children they were supposed to be nurturing and bringing up in the faith. Not only did the abusers steal those kids’ innocence, in many cases they often stole their faith.

It doesn’t get any worse, and it is indefensible. We have to act properly. We have to pray. We have to be patient.

 

[Reformed_Rob]

I’ve been reading St. Vincent of Lerin’s Commonitory, and he speaks for a portion of the work about how great men in the Catholic Church (he uses men like Appolonarius, Nestorius, and Origen, among others) who are great teachers, confessors, Doctors (he calls them) that fall into grave error in some point(s) of doctrine. He says that the greater the teacher, the greater a trial it is for the Church to endure. He uses Deuteronomy 13:1-3 to show that the Lord is trying His flock, to see how many will remain true to the teaching of the Church, and how many will leave it’s haven to be tossed about in the storms of profane novelties.

Applying that to the priest sex abuse scandal, if I were Catholic I’d consider that the father of lies is bringing a trial (approved by the Lord) to try to get as many folks as possible to turn their backs on the church, and also to keep others out. That’s not to excuse the offenders, they’re responsible for their sin, but just because others commit spiritual murder, doesn’t mean we all have to follow and commit spiritual suicide.

Wow, Vincent’s writings still “apply” today!
Better yet - Deuteronomy still “applies” today!

And perhaps there is an actual “trial of profane novelties” being presented to you catholics, what with the SSPX, Traditionalists, Modernists, Progressives, and all that. But that’s a different topic.

But…I’m not Catholic