It's Not About the Media

[markeverett49]

Author: James Martin, S.J.
americamagazine.org/blog/entry.cfm?blog_id=2&entry_id=2712

Excerpt:
To wit: Without the coverage by The Boston Globe in 2002 of the sexual abuse by priests, the Catholic Church in United States would not have confronted the scourge of sexual abuse on a nationwide basis and instituted mandatory guidelines.

Why do I say this? Because years before, in 1985, The National Catholic Reporter reported and editorialized on abuse cases about a notorious Louisiana priest. In great and numbing detail.

What was the response? Well, in 1992, after many closed-door meetings with experts in the intervening years, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops adopted a series of guidelines on dealing with abuse. These, however, were not binding on the bishops, but voluntary.

 

[catharina]

Author: James Martin, S.J.
americamagazine.org/blog/entry.cfm?blog_id=2&entry_id=2712

Excerpt:
To wit: **Without the coverage by The Boston Globe in 2002 of the sexual abuse by priests, the Catholic Church in United States would not have confronted the scourge of sexual abuse on a nationwide basis and instituted mandatory guidelines. **
Why do I say this? Because years before, in 1985, The National Catholic Reporter reported and editorialized on abuse cases about a notorious Louisiana priest. In great and numbing detail.

What was the response? Well, in 1992, after many closed-door meetings with experts in the intervening years, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops adopted a series of guidelines on dealing with abuse. These, however, were not binding on the bishops, but voluntary.

One must first accept that Father Martin knows the mind of God in all matters.
I find that to be highly unlikely.

 

[markeverett49]

One must first accept that Father Martin knows the mind of God in all matters.]

Why must one accept that?

 

[Bobby_Jim]

I would tend to agree; it probably took some high-profile nationwide coverage to convince all of the bishops that this was a widespread problem, not just something that was happening in a few places. An individual bishop might just see one or two allegations in his own diocese, and think it’s an isolated thing, or probably false accusations. It might take national coverage of credible allegations from many, many diocese for an individual bishop to really take seriously that it could be happening in his own diocese, under his own nose. It might also take the public scorn and outrage expressed over other cases for a bishop to decide that, of all the unpleasant administrative stuff he has to deal with on a daily basis, that these sex abuse allegations need to be a high priority to be dealt with seriously and swiftly.

 

[catharina]

Why must one accept that?

To credit Father M’s opinion with certitude,
one must imagine he has eliminated all other possiblites
and therefore relies exclusively on the work of the BostonGlobe.

He has an opinion, not certitude.
Who could possibly have such certitude???

 

[Bobby_Jim]

I would add to my last post, not to defend bishops that let this go on, but just as a matter of fact, different bishops have different strengths and weaknesses. Some are really good administrators. Some others, although they may be very holy and pious pastors, are actually quite ineffective at managing the day-to-day affairs of their diocese, and might place a lower priority on administrative matters like implementing a firm policy on how to deal with sex abuse allegations, versus things they find much more interesting and fulfilling, like say spiritual direction of the priests or catechizing the faithful. This may be why “voluntary” guidelines had little effect - a lot of the bishops volunteered not to do the hard, unpleasant work it takes to implement those guidelines.

 

[catharina]

I would add to my last post, not to defend bishops that let this go on, but just as a matter of fact, different bishops have different strengths and weaknesses. Some are really good administrators. Some others, although they may be very holy and pious pastors, are actually quite ineffective at managing the day-to-day affairs of their diocese, and might place a lower priority on administrative matters like implementing a firm policy on how to deal with sex abuse allegations, versus things they find much more interesting and fulfilling, like say spiritual direction of the priests or catechizing the faithful. This may be why “voluntary” guidelines had little effect - a lot of the bishops volunteered not to do the hard, unpleasant work it takes to implement those guidelines.

Terrifically wise and compassionate observation.
Otherwise it’s so easy to point the finger and grumble about those who fall off the saddle,
esp when one is unwilling to step up and saddle up and ride your own horse.

 

[unafraid]

To credit Father M’s opinion with certitude,
one must imagine he has eliminated all other possiblites
and therefore relies exclusively on the work of the BostonGlobe.

He has an opinion, not certitude.
Who could possibly have such certitude???

Catharina, I credit you with clarity, and echo your sentiments. Also, regarding this title, “It’s Not About the Media”, I must ask the question: What is this vague, “It”, which this nebulous object is “not about”? The very title takes a mult-faceted story, and by the process of reduction, jams it into a subjective simplicity which is patently erroneous. “It” is about the media…and, “It”, is about a multitude of other elements that inhabit the many levels of this story.

The media’s behavior in this matter will be studied for years to come, in all of its complexities. However, it can never be merely negated, as this title suggests. When you have the likes of Alan Dershowitz waying in on the matter of the media’s actions relative to this situation, one can presume that something of cultural, sociological significance is occurring here.

 

[catharina]

Catharina, I credit you with clarity, and echo your sentiments. Also, regarding this title, “It’s Not About the Media”, I must ask the question: What is this vague, “It”, which this nebulous object is “not about”? The very title takes a mult-faceted story, and by the process of reduction, jams it into a subjective simplicity which is patently erroneous. “It” is about the media…and, “It”, is about a multitude of other elements that inhabit the many levels of this story.

The media’s behavior in this matter will be studied for years to come, in all of its complexities. However, it can never be merely negated, as this title suggests. When you have the likes of Alan Dershowitz waying in on the matter of the media’s actions relative to this situation, one can presume that something of cultural, sociological significance is occurring here.

Do ask your question (re “it?”) of the original poster.

 

[catharina]

Catharina, I credit you with clarity, and echo your sentiments.

BTW, thank you for mentioning my clarity.
Giving credit where it’s due, I can only mention
one Father Walsh SJ, who taught me both Logic and Ethics at SLU
(in St. Loius MO) in the mid-60s.
Father Walsh is certainly long deceased.
Yet his teaching is a bit of the eternal variety.

The Jesuits insisted one must take (and pass) those courses in that order.
First LOGIC and then ETHICS. How wise of them.

 

[Barry44]

We know that for the past 2000 years our priests have been engaged in sexual abuse of minors. This sex abuse scandal isn’t some thing that just started after World War ll…
Actually abusing kids have gone on before the Church began. The question is why didn’t we do something about it then, instead of just now;
was it because we didn’t have really any respect for children or women for that matter for the past 2000 years?
Yes, the media digs for news, that’s their job. The disgrace which may not go away is the cover-up of these Judus’s who still damage the Church; it’s the sex abuser and the bishops, not the children who are at fault. The Bishops really can’t understand this because they don’t have any children or grand children of their own.
If we had women priests, this could have never happened. They would not have stopped screaming about it until the offenders were in jail. The offenders, the priests and their bishops should be in jail; now.!

 

[catharina]

We know that for the past 2000 years our priests have been engaged in sexual abuse of minors. This sex abuse scandal isn’t some thing that just started after World War ll…
Actually abusing kids have gone on before the Church began. The question is why didn’t we do something about it then, instead of just now;
was it because we didn’t have really any respect for children or women for that matter for the past 2000 years?
Yes, the media digs for news, that’s their job. The disgrace which may not go away is the cover-up of these Judus’s who still damage the Church; it’s the sex abuser and the bishops, not the children who are at fault. **The Bishops really can’t understand this because they don’t have any children or grand children of their own.
If we had women priests, this could have never happened. They would not have stopped screaming about it until the offenders were in jail. The offenders, the priests and their bishops should be in jail; now.! **

Your attempt at logic fails dismisally.

As many have pointed out, women were among notorious sex abusers in Canada and other nations. Furthermore sex-abuse is an equal-opportunit offense (sin). Most likely to be guilty are men - in their positons of fathers, step-fathers and ‘mom’s boyfriend.’

 

[Barry44]

We discovered that this is not a American problem, nor a Europe problem, but a world problem in every culture, every religion or group; abuse, harassment, rape of our children and women from the begining of time.
Now what to do, will the Catholic Church be the leader in solving this world wide problem or just a bye stander, making excuses and dragging our feet. I for one, believe that Our Holy Father will be the one to find the solutions for all of us too follow and return respectibility to our Church again.
Yes, the media holds us up to a higher standard, they should, we are better than that, let’s show the world what we are capable of doing for our children and women too.

 

[Barry44]

Your attempt at logic fails dismisally.

As many have pointed out, women were among notorious sex abusers in Canada and other nations. Furthermore sex-abuse is an equal-opportunit offense (sin). Most likely to be guilty are men - in their positons of fathers, step-fathers and ‘mom’s boyfriend.’

Thank you for your observation, I was trying to say that a women would not let a man get away with it. Neither would a man let a woman get away with it. Maybe I’m too simple for this form. If we do need more priests, I vote for women priests before married priests. Okay, say I’m dismal. Perhap they would keep each other honest, may be not, just thinking.

 

[catharina]

We discovered that this is not a American problem, nor a Europe problem, but a world problem in every culture, every religion or group; abuse, harassment, rape of our children and women from the begining of time.
Now what to do, will the Catholic Church be the leader in solving this world wide problem or just a bye stander, making excuses and dragging our feet. I for one, believe that Our Holy Father will be the one to find the solutions for all of us too follow and return respectibility to our Church again.
Yes, the media holds us up to a higher standard, they should, we are better than that, let’s show the world what we are capable of doing for our children and women too.

Again you do not make a clear separation between the needs of women and children.
Women have freedom in many cultures and places.

Children NEVER have personal freedom.
We are all called to protect children because they are without legalized personal defense.

Mixing the two groups together as if their needs are identical is no solution.
All people need protection.
Some women (and men) need special protection.

ALL children need profound protection, under the law.

 

[catharina]

Thank you for your observation, I was trying to say that a women would not let a man get away with it. Neither would a man let a woman get away with it. Maybe I’m too simple for this form. If we do need more priests, I vote for women priests before married priests. Okay, say I’m dismal. Perhap they would keep each other honest, may be not, just thinking.

Yet no vote is being taken.
To support the idea of women priests is to ignore the teachings of the Church re this.

In all instances, we are to pray for priests.
We are called to pray for more vocations too.

 

[Barry44]

Again you do not make a clear separation between the needs of women and children.
Women have freedom in many cultures and places.

Children NEVER have personal freedom.
We are all called to protect children because they are without legalized personal defense.

Mixing the two groups together as if their needs are identical is no solution.
All people need protection.
Some women (and men) need special protection.

ALL children need profound protection, under the law.

Here in America we do have laws protecting all men and women and children even animals, but when the Catholic Church interfers with the laws of the land and make outlandish monetary payments to keep the victims quite then its a crime and all those who are involved should be in jail–now.

How about the Catholic priest who gets a 16 year old girl pregnant and then drives her to the abortion clinic. The catholic priest who has three children with a drug addict who he supports, and leaves her dead from an overdose. The catholic bishop who ordaines an unqualified person and then forces him to a sodomized relationship and when caught pays him off from church money. He was exposed by a catholic nun. One priest used a gun to have sex with a young man too , and was caught. These are animals and should be put in jail now.

 

[catharina]

Here in America we do have laws protecting all men and women and children even animals, but when the Catholic Church interfers with the laws of the land and make outlandish monetary payments to keep the victims quite then its a crime and all those who are involved should be in jail–now.

So glad to know your hidden agenda (opinion) at last.
Also so glad to see the Smileys go away.

 

[Barry44]

Yet no vote is being taken.
To support the idea of women priests is to ignore the teachings of the Church re this.

In all instances, we are to pray for priests.
We are called to pray for more vocations too.

You think married priests are the answer to stop all sexual abuse?
If you were in charge, what action would you take.?

 

[catharina]

You think married priests are the answer to stop all sexual abuse?
If you were in charge, what action would you take.?

I would follow the teachings of the Church just as I am doing now:

Priests who receive the Sacrament of Ordination (Latin Rite) are not allowed to marry.
(The exceptions that exist are for ministers coming from other faith traditions.)

There will be no women ordained as priests in the Catholic Church.

How difficult is that?