Staying, Leaving?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Hope1960
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I’m staying. But I’m also changing. We are already a homeschooling Catholic family. We have 6 kids and are on the conservative side. However, I trust and open our family up to the Church less. Not just priests either. In our diocese there is current scandals that are in court. There is silence from the priests. There is a full on assault of the liturgy. I wouldn’t currently trust even a youth program. It isn’t because and not because I think there is a boogie man in every Church corner but rather just the blatant inability to recognize and face the evil. People in our diocese and even in our own parish just have no idea how to recognize or address the evil. And that means that they cannot prevent it, or in the worst case scenario deal with it. So that will be a gigantic “NO” on my children or family participating in any Church run program. I’d far rather send my kids to a public school or parks and rec event than the Church. Not only that but the pocketbooks are closed. pretty much permanently. Long gone are the days of funding parking lots and new stairs and gala events. Long gone are donations to the annual appeal. These monies went to paying the legal fees of an abuser. Paid for the internet and housing enabling him to abuse or try to abuse. It funds the seminary that I would never send my son to. etc. When it gets to the point that my multi million dollar parish needs candles and Hosts to function they can call me.
Also, this comes at a time of great personal tests for my wife and I in regards to life and marriage issues, a place where sadly the Church has given up and even if it didn’t it has no authority.

There are a couple of positives though.
  1. Having completely been abandoned by both the local and worldwide Church, The historical and Traditional Church guides well. It has caused me to almost exclusively consult the saints and the scriptures to guide us now. Learning and being led by saints is a rewarding experience.
  2. The sheer evil of the abuses. both locally and internationally and the horrid descriptions of them have in some weird way transformed itself into a faith affirming thing. For example, if this evil exists and is coming to light now, and the horrid things are true, then surely the devil is real and the devil attacks the institution of God. Somehow sickly almost affirming the Church is the real Church of God. And if the demonic nature of such evil exists then also the thing the evil is attacking exists. And if that exists then what the scriptures and saints say about it is true.
 
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Tolkien on scandal in the Church, from a letter to his son Michael in 1963 (250):

Staying, forever.
 
Last edited:
RosalieM said:
I have been heartbroken and physically nauseated since this latest monster reared its ugly head. Last night I reflected on my spiritual journey. Born Catholic, then away from the Church for a long time, converted to Judaism, wasn’t accepted…joined an eastern meditation path and left when the leader turned out to be a charlatan, returned to the Catholic Church 12 years ago.
So I thought…where can I go? If I become Protestant I’d have to abandon the BVM and my beloved saints. No adoration, no confession.
I’ll have to wait til the nausea and heartbreak go away. I’m adopting the stance of Scarlett O’Hara’s statement …‘Oh I don’t want to think about that now. I’ll think about it tomorrow.’ …and try to avoid the newscasts.
Click to expand...
We have a lot in common. I was born Catholic, left the Church and while I didn’t convert to Judaism or an Eastern meditation path I did learn a little about New Age, crystals, and from my then-psychologists got into meditation, listening to subliminal persuasion tapes etc., then returned to the Catholic Church 12 years ago this past spring.

And I too, don’t want to abandon Mama Mary, St. Dymphna, St. Jude, St. Clare, St. Teresa Avila, St, Therese of Lisieux, Adoration, Reconciliation or the Eucharist.
 
Last edited:
TMC said:
The numbers I have been seeing are that about 9% of priests in the US have been involved in sexual acts with minors. Add to that the numbers that knew about that 9% and did nothing, and where do you get? A third? More? Frankly, I am becoming concerned that 9% is an underestimate based on the recent reports from Boston.
Click to expand...
May ask where you get that number? The John Jay study found about 4% (of course even that is 4% too many) between 1950 and 2002. And we know that the rate has gone down since 2002. Even the Pennsylvania report found almost nothing after 2002.
 
Last edited:
EnglishTeacher said:
May ask where you get that number? The John Jay study found about 4% (of course even that is 4% too many) between 1950 and 2002. And we know that the rate has gone down since 2002. Even the Pennsylvania report found almost nothing after 2002.
Click to expand...
On another thread, some posters did the math by comparing the priests in the Boston report with the total number of priests in the diocese over the same period. 9% is also consistent with the findings of the late Richard Sipes. I know that many Catholics do not like Sipes (a former priest and psychologist who worked with troubled priests), but it seems to me pretty much everything Sipes said has turned out to be true so far.
 
Yes we have a lot in common!!! Yesterday I found myself eyeing the location of a yoga center near me. I’m no longer completely closing the door to New Age everything. And this morning I thought of the offenders as spiritual terrorists.
But not leaving my beautiful saints ever!!! And I’ve found the purity of the Blessed Virgin to be healing.
My return to the church was 12 years ago June 6th. I had the (then) monsignor of my parish on the phone talking me through how I could detach from the meditation center.
p.s. - I see someone posted the St. Michael prayer. There is one nearby church that has it recited after each mass. I wish all churches would do the same.
 
I have never consider leaving. You don’t plow up the garden because of a few weeds.
 
100% Catholic to the core. I will never leave the Church Christ founded. With that stated, I’m very angry at this situation. This is very damaging to the Church. What will they do when all of the old people die. Who fills the pews on Sunday’s? Time for Cardinal Wuerl to resign and the Pope! I believe Archbishop Vigano and nothing has been provided by the Vatican to refute these claims! Just deafening silence!!!
 
Last edited:
TMC said:
On another thread, some posters did the math by comparing the priests in the Boston report with the total number of priests in the diocese over the same period. 9% is also consistent with the findings of the late Richard Sipes. I know that many Catholics do not like Sipes (a former priest and psychologist who worked with troubled priests), but it seems to me pretty much everything Sipes said has turned out to be true so far.
Click to expand...
Perhaps that estimate is roughly accurate in the Boston archdiocese, or was at one time. I don’t think you can extrapolate from that and say it is true of the entire population of priests. My diocese, for instance (going by the BishopAccountability website) has only had a small handful of accusations and all except one are from decades ago. Some dioceses such as Boston and probably the Pennsylvania dioceses may have had issues for many years in how they screened (or failed to screen) candidates for the priesthood and in how they failed to deal with abuse, and the percentages may be higher there.

Also, did those who did this estimate account for the fact that the abuse accusations occurred over the course of many decades? If they are grouping all the cases into the present and counting them into the current total number of priests, then their estimate for sure is inaccurate because many of those priests are dead or no longer in ministry.
 
Last edited:
EnglishTeacher said:
Perhaps that estimate is roughly accurate in the Boston archdiocese, or was at one time. I don’t think you can extrapolate from that and say it is true of the entire population of priests. My diocese, for instance (going by the BishopAccountability website) has only had a small handful of accusations and all except one are from decades ago. Some dioceses such as Boston and probably the Pennsylvania dioceses may have had issues for many years in how they screened (or failed to screen) candidates for the priesthood and in how they failed to deal with abuse, and the percentages may be higher there.

Also, did those who did this estimate account for the fact that the abuse accusations occurred over the course of many decades? If they are grouping all the cases into the present and counting them into the current total number of priests, then their estimate for sure is inaccurate because many of those priests are dead or no longer in ministry.
Click to expand...
My understanding is that the estimates do take time into account, yes.

I don’t know how things are in your diocese. I can say that any Catholic that thinks there is not a serious systemic problem here is kidding themselves. This is not a simple matter of a “screening” problem in one or two places. The problem is both deeper and broader than that. These abuses have been going on for generations - in fact for hundreds of years, it appears. It is time for the laity, the body of the Church, to say “enough,” to hold people accountable, and to demand real change.
 
I think its best to stay. That way you avoid the coming back later hassle.
 
TMC said:
I can say that any Catholic that thinks there is not a serious systemic problem here is kidding themselves.
Click to expand...
I dispute the figures, but agree there is a problem.
TMC said:
This is not a simple matter of a “screening” problem in one or two places. The problem is both deeper and broader than that.
Click to expand...
Rigorously screening and evaluating the men who apply for the priesthood is still an important first step; don’t you think? Up until the last 12-15 years (give or take) the process was far more lax, and many men became priests who never should have even made it into seminary. We are already seeing much better formed priests, overall, in the current younger generation, since the reforms of the early 2000s.
 
I am staying. Jesus is within me and that will never change. Glory to God forever. But, it definitely changed my perspective and trust of the Pope. I will continue attending mass and waiting for a true response from the Vatican.
 
I agree with you. I am considering to not give any more money to the church. It is a shame to learn how much money has been given to remodeling some of the places where “these” individuals are sent as a “punishment” to “pray and penance. after moving from parish to parish hurting children and seminarians.” Lord I trust in you.
 
Mon33 said:
I am staying. Jesus is within me and that will never change. Glory to God forever. But, it definitely changed my perspective and trust of the Pope. I will continue attending mass and waiting for a true response from the Vatican.
Click to expand...
I’d really like to hear the Pope’s comments. It upsets me the he is so open and vocal about everything else and now he chooses to clam up. Makes me wonder what he’s hiding.
 
EnglishTeacher said:
Rigorously screening and evaluating the men who apply for the priesthood is still an important first step; don’t you think? Up until the last 12-15 years (give or take) the process was far more lax, and many men became priests who never should have even made it into seminary. We are already seeing much better formed priests, overall, in the current younger generation, since the reforms of the early 2000s.
Click to expand...
I agree that screening is important, but it is such a simple and fundamental step that it hardly qualifies as reform. Its sort of a bare minimum in most organizations.

I do have to disagree that there is any reason to think that things are much better in the last 12-15 years. Even in the best of worlds, we really don’t know that yet. Priestly formation takes many years, and we have certainly seen that reports of abuse lag many years behind the act. Maybe in another 20 years we can say that what has been done is helpful, but I am not hopeful that the minimal changes will produce significant results.

What we do know is that many of the individuals in charge of the formation of priests (and of the Church generally) have been directly involved in abuse - either as abusers or enablers. We also know that ALL of the current leaders of the Church came out of the same culture that created the crisis. This give me little reason for optimism that the minimal changes in the last decade can undo centuries of problems.

Which brings me to the most important point. This problem is deeply rooted and has been going on for many generations. We know that Saint Damian and others wrote centuries ago about the exact kinds of abuses we are seeing today. We read over and over that the abusers of today were exposed to abuse as seminarians, and that those that abused them were products of the same abuse. There is every reason to believe that chain of abuse goes back generations. That kind of problem cannot be fixed with a couple of declarations and new intake process. It will require a deep examination of the problems in the clerical culture, its root causes, and real reform. In my view, those reforms will require more transparency than the Church has ever allowed, and probably will require real lay oversight over clerical processes. Whether the Church will allow real reform remains to be seen. Whether such reform is needed should be beyond question at this point.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top