New York Times: Vatican Declined to Defrock U.S. Priest Who Abused Boys

  • Thread starter Thread starter SoonerforChrist
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

SoonerforChrist

Guest
nytimes.com/2010/03/25/world/europe/25vatican.htm

In this article I am made to believe from the New York Times the following:
  1. The Vatican declined to defrock U.S. priest who abused boys for X reason.
  2. The Pope also declined to defrock U.S. priest who abused boys for X reason.
  3. That the U.S. bishops (the good guys) constantly called on the Vatican for their help.
  4. The Vatican and the Pope #1 priority was to cover up the scandal.
  5. Pope Benedict did not alert local authorities in Munich of a bad priest.
  6. The Vatican conducted a “secret canonical” trial for Fr. Murphy.
  7. The New York Times in its valiant approach fought so hard to obtain documents, which the church fought to keep secret.
  8. Fr. Murphy was never tried or disciplined by the church’s own justice system.
  9. The Vatican’s insistence on secrecy has often impeded such cooperation with local authorities
  10. The Church is hiding all the documents in the case and continuing to cover up sex abuse.
You know I am frankly quite sick of hearing this from the MSM. Can somebody make an argument for how unfounded these claims are? Or at least take the half truth and make it complete truth?
 
 
SoonerforChrist said:
Can somebody make an argument for how unfounded these claims are?
Click to expand...
In addition to the links already provided I would like to add my own rebuttal: the claims are from the New York Times. Of course they’re unfounded. It’s the Wikipedia of print journalism.
 
I am a clinician that works with both sex offenders and victims. I have read the hand written notes from the ATSA (Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers) credentialed clinician who evaluated the Priest (NYT posted them). As an ATSA clinician, I can recognize the many ways she was telling the reader that this was a man who did not fully recognize his behavior as a crime or as innapropriate, and that his level of denial and cognitive distortions suggested a significant likelihood of re-offense and insuitability for treatment or rehabilitation. In addition, the assessor highlights the Priest’s use of the sacrament of confession to both identify his victims, and to abuse them.

I think the Catholic Church is no different than any other organization that works with children. We are under educated about sexual offenders, and the recalcitrant nature of these behaviors. A Priest or individual may confess and receive forgiveness, however, that is not equal to curing his sexual addiction to children.

Let us pray for wisdom and honest self-examination as a church, to become a model of child safety, openness, and accountability. Don’t let the MSM get you distracted from this goal!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top