'Prepare to be shocked," Milwaukee archbishop warns of priest sex files

[markomalley]

Regarding the sex abuse crisis.

It’s not the media
It’s not greedy lawyers
It’s not greedy abuse victims
It’s not the homosexuals
It’s not the 60’s.
It’s not Vatican II.
It’s not the Liberals
It’s not heterodoxy
It’s not sexualized kids tempting priests.
It’s not the Devil
It’s not that the lay people aren’t praying for priests enough.

It’s grievously sinning (and criminal) predatory priests and equally, the church leadership that covered up the abuse.

Stop the excuses.

Actually, you are partially correct and partially incorrect.

• It was the media (the pop culture spreading error)
• It is greedy lawyers (taking advantage of situations where dioceses would rather settle than fight…especially in the case of deceased priests)
• It is sometimes greedy abuse victims (there are an increasing percentage of unsubstantiated claims)
• It is the homosexuals (homosexuals are not to be admitted into the priesthood…and over 80% of the cases of abuse were cases of homosexual ephebophilia…whether you want to admit it or not)
• It is the 60’s and the sexualization of the culture (though the problem existed before, it became radically worse with priests beginning with those ordained in the late 60s)
• It’s not Vatican II. (but it might be partially attributed to “the spirit of Vatican II”, or as Pope Benedict XVI called it, “the council of the media”)
• It’s not the Liberals (but it is the modernists…see Pope Pius X, Pascendi)
• It is absolutely heterodoxy (in as much as orthodoxy would have resulted in a strict application of existing standards for those being admitted to the seminary and into the Holy Orders)
• It’s not sexualized kids tempting priests.
• It’ is ultimately the Devil
• It’s not that the lay people aren’t praying for priests enough. (I can’t evaluate that one)

It’s grievously sinning (and criminal) predatory priests and equally more so, the church leadership that covered up the abuse. This one is the bottom line. All of the above come down to the shepherds not being willing to use both ends of the crozier in the way they were designed to be used.

 

[ReConverted]

I don’t doubt that for several hundred years, particularly when families like the della Rovere, Medici, Cibo, Piccolomini, and Borgia were dominating affairs of the Church, that it was a horrible time of corruption.

And that Renaissance period was certainly not the only time of corruption in the Church.

But I also believe that it is stretching matters to imply that it has gone throughout the entire history of the Church…implying that this is the norm.

Generally speaking, in an argument, when one advances a thesis, one should be prepared to defend that thesis. And if the one who advances a thesis fails to provide a defense, the thesis can be rejected out of hand.

So do you have some sort of reference you can supply to back up your assertion?

 

[ReConverted]

I don’t doubt that for several hundred years, particularly when families like the della Rovere, Medici, Cibo, Piccolomini, and Borgia were dominating affairs of the Church, that it was a horrible time of corruption.

And that Renaissance period was certainly not the only time of corruption in the Church.

But I also believe that it is stretching matters to imply that it has gone throughout the entire history of the Church…implying that this is the norm.

Generally speaking, in an argument, when one advances a thesis, one should be prepared to defend that thesis. And if the one who advances a thesis fails to provide a defense, the thesis can be rejected out of hand.

So do you have some sort of reference you can supply to back up your assertion?

Sure. For one, the Didache.

“Chapter 2. The Second Commandment: Grave Sin Forbidden. And the second commandment of the Teaching; You shall not commit murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not commit pederasty, you shall not commit fornication, you shall not steal, you shall not practice magic, you shall not practice witchcraft, you shall not murder a child by abortion nor kill that which is born. You shall not covet the things of your neighbor, you shall not swear, you shall not bear false witness, you shall not speak evil, you shall bear no grudge. You shall not be double-minded nor double-tongued, for to be double-tongued is a snare of death. Your speech shall not be false, nor empty, but fulfilled by deed. You shall not be covetous, nor rapacious, nor a hypocrite, nor evil disposed, nor haughty. You shall not take evil counsel against your neighbor. You shall not hate any man; but some you shall reprove, and concerning some you shall pray, and some you shall love more than your own life.”

 

[ReConverted]

suite101.com/article/roman-catholicisms-long-history-of-child-abuse-a331760

 

[LisaA]

**

Did they, at some point, just stop looking to see if any of their candidates for Orders had any of these issues? I’m citing a document from 1962. I’m not citing something from today.**

Realize that the above mostly related to heterosexual males being unable to maintain celibacy. Only #4 mentions homosexuality and then only with respect to their time in seminary. The research I did before converting indicated that certain seminaries became well known to foster homosexual activity, to the point that they could identify and discourage if not run off holy and orthodox men wanting to be priests. There was a conspiracy of silence between the seminarians and those on the staff who participated. If you can recall, at the time of formation, the priesthood was a place for homosexuals to hide with social acceptability. But that they hid in seminary and behind the collar didn’t change their nature. And it was a time when the concept of a predatory homosexual just wasn’t on the average Catholic’s radar.

It was a perfect storm of opportunity meets debauchery…priests in positions of trust, as teachers, priests alone with altar BOYS as they were at the time, priests as counselors for troubled youth, priests operating boys’ homes. Further at the time the Church had incredible power and a boy who may have reported such behavior would have been dismissed out of hand. The original Boston Globe reporters also noted that the offending priests were often very careful about choosing their victims. Under the pretense of wanting to mentor boys who didn’t have a father in the home or had an abusive, alcoholic father, they could more easily get away with their evil activity. They picked the vulnerable, just like lions pick the weak animals for prey.

When the offending behavior came to light, the hierarchy truly didn’t know how to deal with it. You wonder why they didn’t pick up the phone and turn it over to law enforcement rather than dealing internally with the problem. I don’t believe the hierarchy ever had the understanding of the tragic results of this incredible lapse of judgment. I just think the whole problem was so out of the realm of their reality that they hoped to deal with it within the Church or by referring to psychiatry or counselling. Yet another conspiracy of silence results in a much worse result than had they let the sunshine in and scoured out the evil

Lisa.

 

[LisaA]

Actually, you are partially correct and partially incorrect.

• It was the media (the pop culture spreading error)
• It is greedy lawyers (taking advantage of situations where dioceses would rather settle than fight…especially in the case of deceased priests)
• It is sometimes greedy abuse victims (there are an increasing percentage of unsubstantiated claims)
• It is the homosexuals (homosexuals are not to be admitted into the priesthood…and over 80% of the cases of abuse were cases of homosexual ephebophilia…whether you want to admit it or not)
• It is the 60’s and the sexualization of the culture (though the problem existed before, it became radically worse with priests beginning with those ordained in the late 60s)
• It’s not Vatican II. (but it might be partially attributed to “the spirit of Vatican II”, or as Pope Benedict XVI called it, “the council of the media”)
• It’s not the Liberals (but it is the modernists…see Pope Pius X, Pascendi)
• It is absolutely heterodoxy (in as much as orthodoxy would have resulted in a strict application of existing standards for those being admitted to the seminary and into the Holy Orders)
• It’s not sexualized kids tempting priests.
• It’ is ultimately the Devil
• It’s not that the lay people aren’t praying for priests enough. (I can’t evaluate that one)

It’s grievously sinning (and criminal) predatory priests and equally more so, the church leadership that covered up the abuse. This one is the bottom line. All of the above come down to the shepherds not being willing to use both ends of the crozier in the way they were designed to be used.

Spot on!

 

[markomalley]

Sure. For one, the Didache.

“Chapter 2. The Second Commandment: Grave Sin Forbidden. And the second commandment of the Teaching; You shall not commit murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not commit pederasty, you shall not commit fornication, you shall not steal, you shall not practice magic, you shall not practice witchcraft, you shall not murder a child by abortion nor kill that which is born. You shall not covet the things of your neighbor, you shall not swear, you shall not bear false witness, you shall not speak evil, you shall bear no grudge. You shall not be double-minded nor double-tongued, for to be double-tongued is a snare of death. Your speech shall not be false, nor empty, but fulfilled by deed. You shall not be covetous, nor rapacious, nor a hypocrite, nor evil disposed, nor haughty. You shall not take evil counsel against your neighbor. You shall not hate any man; but some you shall reprove, and concerning some you shall pray, and some you shall love more than your own life.”

And? So does this also mean they had a bad problem with witches in the 1st Century AD?

 

[markomalley]

Not “dirt”–the truth of the events and how they happened…

No, what they are **trying **to do is to dig up dirt.

I haven’t seen where they’ve found any yet. So they are trying to take, as you say, reasonable and prudent measures exercised by the Cardinal and cast them in the worst possible light in an effort to create dirt where none, so far, exists.

 

[markomalley]

Spot on!

I was stationed on a mountaintop communications site in Turkey for a year. I learned a lot observing the locals.

There are a LOT of sheep in the countryside in Turkey. Grazing up and down the mountains. Sheep have got to be the most stupid creatures I have ever seen. They are dirty, nasty, smell bad, don’t care where they expel waste, don’t care about anything.

Except eating.

And, during the correct time of year…uhhhhh…making more sheep, shall we say.

They are so stupid, they don’t even pay attention to flies that are buzzing around them and taking bites out of them.

I have literally seen a sheep eat its way off a 3,000 foot cliff before. No joke. The shepherd doesn’t like that,

Well, a shepherd is equipped with two tools. The sheepdog and the crook. The crook has two ends…a hooked end and a staff. You’d think the staff is for defending the sheep? No. The dog does that. The dog also helps guide the sheep, but that’s a different matter.

A shepherd gets a sheep to stop by grabbing it with the hooked end and yanking HARD!

A shepherd gets a sheep to go by using the staff end and applying “delicately” to the part of the sheep’s anatomy used to make more sheep, shall we say.

Consider this: Our Lord chose the shepherd and the sheep as a metaphor to describe the relationship between pastors and the faithful (with Him, of course, being the “good shepherd”). I never really understood that until I was stationed on that mountaintop in Turkey. Gave me incredible insight into that metaphor.

I, for one, would love to see, as part of the formation process for candidates for the episcopacy to have them spend a couple of weeks or even a month in a contemplative retreat with an old-school shepherd…whether that would be in Italy, in Greece, or in Turkey. I think that would give them a really good insight into the job they are going to take.

 

[LisaA]

I was stationed on a mountaintop communications site in Turkey for a year. I learned a lot observing the locals.

There are a LOT of sheep in the countryside in Turkey. Grazing up and down the mountains. Sheep have got to be the most stupid creatures I have ever seen. They are dirty, nasty, smell bad, don’t care where they expel waste, don’t care about anything.

Except eating.

And, during the correct time of year…uhhhhh…making more sheep, shall we say.

They are so stupid, they don’t even pay attention to flies that are buzzing around them and taking bites out of them.

I have literally seen a sheep eat its way off a 3,000 foot cliff before. No joke. The shepherd doesn’t like that,

Well, a shepherd is equipped with two tools. The sheepdog and the crook. The crook has two ends…a hooked end and a staff. You’d think the staff is for defending the sheep? No. The dog does that. The dog also helps guide the sheep, but that’s a different matter.

A shepherd gets a sheep to stop by grabbing it with the hooked end and yanking HARD!

A shepherd gets a sheep to go by using the staff end and applying “delicately” to the part of the sheep’s anatomy used to make more sheep, shall we say.

Consider this: Our Lord chose the shepherd and the sheep as a metaphor to describe the relationship between pastors and the faithful (with Him, of course, being the “good shepherd”). I never really understood that until I was stationed on that mountaintop in Turkey. Gave me incredible insight into that metaphor.

I, for one, would love to see, as part of the formation process for candidates for the episcopacy to have them spend a couple of weeks or even a month in a contemplative retreat with an old-school shepherd…whether that would be in Italy, in Greece, or in Turkey. I think that would give them a really good insight into the job they are going to take.

Wonderful! Great metaphors and much of these somewhat subtle teachings are lost on those who did not grow up around sheep (I did). Actually I think you are onto something. Our urban dwelling candidates probably have little concept of what it is to be a true shepherd. I loved Pope Francis’ words, that the shepherd should “smell of the sheep” a way of bringing the clergy down to relate to their “sheep” for whom they are responsible.

Lisa

 

[VeritasLuxMea]

jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/prepare-to-be-shocked-milwaukee-archbishop-warns-of-priest-sex-files-b9944386z1-213713061.html

Batten down the hatches, folks. The MSM will have a field day.

How could that possibly be considered the worst thing here? The media is going to have a field day? So what? How about don’t touch little boys and don’t cover it up? Much bigger concern. The Church will survive anything, but light must be shed on these crimes.

Sorry if I misunderstood you, I’m sure you take this seriously too.

 

[LisaA]

How could that possibly be considered the worst thing here? The media is going to have a field day? So what? How about don’t touch little boys and don’t cover it up? Much bigger concern. The Church will survive anything, but light must be shed on these crimes.

Sorry if I misunderstood you, I’m sure you take this seriously too.

Who said it was the worst thing? Simply a head’s up to be prepared for the response from the MSM which never tires of taking opportunities to put the Church in the worst possible light. It’s amazing how many millions of people fed, housed, given medical care, refuge, and schooling due to the Church’s efforts are completely ignored. But if events twenty years ago can be exploited by screaming headlines, trust me, they will.

Lisa

 

[adrift]

How could that possibly be considered the worst thing here? The media is going to have a field day? So what? How about don’t touch little boys and don’t cover it up? Much bigger concern. The Church will survive anything, but light must be shed on these crimes.

Sorry if I misunderstood you, I’m sure you take this seriously too.

Please define what you mean by “little boy”. The priest who participated in this abuse should be punished but descriptions should be accurate. Males over the age of 12 are no longer little boys. That does not change the seriousness of these charges but it doesn’t give a false picture either.

 

[Cojuanco]

My concern is that whenever our bishops speak out at an injustice, people will respond wih the lists of crimes made public. Every time I say something to defend the Chuch, they will say, “but your priests rape boys, so we should not listen to you.” Illogical yes, but most people’s arguments are not formed logically.

That is the downside of our transparency. I just hope we can deal with it.

 

[LisaA]

Please define what you mean by “little boy”. The priest who participated in this abuse should be punished but descriptions should be accurate. Males over the age of 12 are no longer little boys. That does not change the seriousness of these charges but it doesn’t give a false picture either.

Of course the point of calling them “little boys” or calling them pedophile priests is to make the “filth” as Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI called, even more filthy. Certainly preying upon adolescents is disgusting in every way but it’s far more pejorative to call the abusing priests pedophiles than pederasts which is more accurate.

I understand wanting to disclose the information but too often the headlines scream inferences that the abuse continues apace without any intervention on the part of the Church. The reality is that the majority of these crimes occurred decades ago and the Church has done a great deal not only to provide just compensation to the victims and to prevent future predators from having access to vulnerable young people.

But you won’t read about that believe me.

Lisa

 

[Cojuanco]

Of course the point of calling them “little boys” or calling them pedophile priests is to make the “filth” as Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI called, even more filthy. Certainly preying upon adolescents is disgusting in every way but it’s far more pejorative to call the abusing priests pedophiles than pederasts which is more accurate.

I understand wanting to disclose the information but too often the headlines scream inferences that the abuse continues apace without any intervention on the part of the Church. The reality is that the majority of these crimes occurred decades ago and the Church has done a great deal not only to provide just compensation to the victims and to prevent future predators from having access to vulnerable young people.

But you won’t read about that believe me.

Lisa

Hence my apprehension of complete transparency all at once. Why give the anticlerical press more fodder?

It may be necessary, but I am afraid of the consequences.

 

[LisaA]

Hence my apprehension of complete transparency all at once. Why give the anticlerical press more fodder?

Unfortunately I agree with your previous post. People do not make judgments about a situation based on facts and analysis but on knee jerk responses to headlines, inferences, and vague allegations.

I read an article about how to READ news articles and it pointed out the many tricks of the trade and ways readers are led to believe what the reporter wants them to believe. I’ve never read another article without applying these thoughts and ideas. Too often you’ll see a provacative headline only to find it completely contradicted deep inside the feature. Unfortunately there are no good answers…if information is withheld or dribbled out piecemeal there will be accusations of a cover up (were the press half as interested in the various coverups of the current Administration!). If there is a big data dump, bits and pieces will be extracted to provide maximum damage.

As the OP stated, hang on for a wild ride. The slings and arrows are coming.

Lsia

 

[Cojuanco]

Unfortunately I agree with your previous post. People do not make judgments about a situation based on facts and analysis but on knee jerk responses to headlines, inferences, and vague allegations.

I read an article about how to READ news articles and it pointed out the many tricks of the trade and ways readers are led to believe what the reporter wants them to believe. I’ve never read another article without applying these thoughts and ideas. Too often you’ll see a provacative headline only to find it completely contradicted deep inside the feature. Unfortunately there are no good answers…if information is withheld or dribbled out piecemeal there will be accusations of a cover up (were the press half as interested in the various coverups of the current Administration!). If there is a big data dump, bits and pieces will be extracted to provide maximum damage.

As the OP stated, hang on for a wild ride. The slings and arrows are coming.

Lsia

Do you have the link to the article?

 

[Schism_hater]

I think this needs to be reiterated:

In their letters, both Listecki and Sklba emphasized a common theme within the church hierarchy throughout the sex abuse scandal — that the understanding of child sex abuse has evolved, and that —*** to use Listecki’s words, “it is easy to question decisions of the past with the insight of today.”

Over 40 years, Sklba wrote, “society’s general attitude toward perpetrators of sexual abuse moved in a trajectory from understanding abuse as sin with the possibility of forgiveness, to psychological flaw with hope of treatment, to deeper issues of addiction and finally to criminal activity.”***

Note the bolded portion. We all know that hindsight is 20-20 but for some reason this is the standard with respect to this issue when it comes to the Church.

Isn’t the Body of Christ supposed to be possessed of greater wisdom and integrity than the world in general? How is it that these “shepherds” were taken in by all these secular theories? And, more importantly, your talk about “forgiveness” in this and your previous post is out of place in this diiscussion. Certainly there should be forgiveness for sins, even grave, that are truly repented of, but that has NOTHING to do with the practice of putting these troubled clergy back in charge of children and teenagers again. That was simply sloth, deception, and idolatry (making an idol out of the Church’s outward image at the expense of further victims) on the part of the hierarchy.

 

[Fairwinds]

…
In their letters, both Listecki and Sklba emphasized a common theme within the church hierarchy throughout the sex abuse scandal — that the understanding of child sex abuse has evolved, and that —*** to use Listecki’s words, “it is easy to question decisions of the past with the insight of today.”

Over 40 years, Sklba wrote, “society’s general attitude toward perpetrators of sexual abuse moved in a trajectory from understanding abuse as sin with the possibility of forgiveness, to psychological flaw with hope of treatment, to deeper issues of addiction and finally to criminal activity.”***…

Lisa

I’m fairly certain the victims always considered it criminal.