Pope Benedict’s letter on sex abuse is not an attack on Francis (or Vatican II) - from America the Jesuit Review

[CilladeRoma]

Cericalism is not a cop-out.
In fact, I believe , like many, that clericalism is one of the roots of the problem.
It was clericalism that moved priests around, blamed victims and did everything humanly possible to “protect the Church at all costs.”
To me, and many others I have talked with, while we all agree that the actual abuse of children is reprehensible, it was the years of cover-ups that is the most scandalous.

 

[jack63]

I personally think both Popes Benedict and Francis are right. They are just looking at the problem from different points of views. The problem is clericalism and a collapse in moral theology.

Both Popes certainly agree that this problem is fundamentally a spiritual problem though.

 

[jack63]

I know when I was in high school, it would have been pretty normal for a 16-year-old girl to date a guy in his early 20s

It was still pretty common to see this even in the late 90’s at least where I grew up. High school students would joke about it being illegal.

The NAMBLA thing is creepy though. I remember first hearing about it and thinking they made it up and something like that could never have really happened.

“Dazed and Confused”

How is Matthew McConaughey ever going to live down those lines as Wooderson…

 

[Dovekin]

I think clericalism has deeper significance here than just in the cover up. Most abuse is not about sexual attraction, but about power.

Power, success, advancement are important in clerical culture and that creates an atmosphere where the cardinal is better than a bishop is… better than a priest who is better than an altar boy. Humility is praised, but never rewarded. That rigid hierarchy is distinct from religious hierarchy but is easily confused because there is so much overlap.

The issue is not 20 year olds dating 15 year olds. It is the “low man on the totem pole” being abused by those above him. For those lowest, the abuse is the worst, often perpetrated by the penultimate who has had to endure many abuses.

IOW, the sexual morality was not really the problem. Yertle the Turtle was the problem, stories of unjust hierarchies. Break the secrecy, as the sexual revolution did, and the hierarchy collapses.

 

[gracepoole]

I really don’t understand why I should bother with what Benedict says now about the crisis. When had the opportunity as head of the CDF to report abusive priests to law enforcement, he didn’t.

 

[CilladeRoma]

Oh, I agree. I have spoken with many people, lay and clerical, who would agree with you 100%.

I was just addressing the fact that so many, especially on this forum, think that clericalism is a “cop-out” and that the only “real” problem is “the gays”.

 

[CilladeRoma]

I have to agree with you.
As Pope and as the head of the CDF, a lot more could have been done to reign in these abusive priests.

I know that in my diocese, my Ordinary, among others, had many run-ins with the CDF during Ratzingers time there, mostly regarding things my more progressive Bishop was doing, and not a thing about abuse.
I can’t help but to think if he was so concerned, maybe he should have done something a lot sooner, like when he had the chance.

Now, I just see this as a “poor me, they didn’t listen to me then, so I couldn’t fix it, but, ya know, it’s sex that is the problem, not any of us.”

 

[twf]

Different cultures and time periods draw different lines. In Canada, the age of sexual consent is 16… so it is legal for an older man to have a relationship with a 16 year old. In many (all?) US states, she would have to be 18.

I also think it’s very different for a man (or woman) to notice the physical features of a physically mature underaged teenager, but never act on it, than for an adult man or woman to experience sexual attraction to a young child. The latter is a serious mental illness.

 

[CilladeRoma]

In NYS, the age of consent is 17.

 

[commenter]

No, when he was pope and before, he often spoke about the culture of relativism. Unfortunately people didn’t listen, they never thought it would have consequences in the real world.

 

[commenter]

my Ordinary, among others, had many run-ins with the CDF during Ratzingers time there, mostly regarding things my more progressive Bishop was doing, and not a thing about abuse.

The CDF is about doctrine. So yeah, he did tend to focus on his assignment.
Other persons were responsible for clerical discipline other than doctrine.

 

[twf]

But of course to be clear… it is reprehensible for older adults to pursue relationships with underaged teens however one defines that “attraction”.

 

[TMC]

The CDF is about doctrine. So yeah, he did tend to focus on his assignment.
Other persons were responsible for clerical discipline other than doctrine.

This is not entirely accurate. The CDF has authority over certain categories of priestly misconduct, including sexual abuse. http://www.vatican.va/resources/resources_guide-CDF-procedures_en.html That practice started at least by 2001, while the Pope Emeritus was still CDF. At least some cases appear to have been sent to CDF before that time, though. The CDF is much more than a doctrine shop; it has an important role in Church governance.

 

[YourNameHere]

I lived that era. I must have missed that “nomalization of pedophilia thing” you speak of. I don’t believe that ever happen. And it never will.

 

[Nigel7]

 

[C.Ray]

Thanks for posting that. I am going to go induce vomiting now.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Nowadays there are often state laws that protect minors to an older age if the older person pursuing them is their teacher or someone else in authority over them. Also, some of the age of consent laws for younger age are Romeo and Juliet laws where the older person in the relationship cannot be above a certain age.

I have seen teachers arrested and fired for getting caught with 17-year-olds in the lovers’ lane.

 

[stpurl]

Hindsight is always 20/20. Probably Pope Benedict himself says and knows he ‘could have done more’. Isn’t that always the case? Looking back with all the knowledge we have gained in 20-30 years, we always believe that the people who were living through it THEN should have, or could have, somehow been exactly as savvy as we are NOW and thus 'should have done X, Y, and Z".

Well you know, it’s probably a good thing for all of us that when it comes down to it, we face the only real ‘just and merciful judge’ who is God. Because we humans aren’t ‘just and merciful’ to each other, that’s for sure.