A reader writes:
I have been following the lengthy comments on the arrest of the LifeTeen founder on sexual abuse charges. I thought I might add my comment as a victim of sexual abuse at the hands of religious (in my case a Christian brother).
It has taken me many years to deal with the effects of this. I have also quietly observed the news and instances that have surfaced over many years. I strongly feel that this is NOT a failing of the Catholic Church. This is a failing of individuals. We are all sinners.
In hearing reports of Catholic abuse, I am profoundly saddened and where it is proven to be fact, strong measures MUST be taken, but I also hear about abuse in other Christian groups, by hockey coaches, by babysitters, and in many other circumstances. These are all tragedies, but they are the failings of individuals who sin in an act that victimizes the most vulnerable.
We must all be on guard to come to the aid of those in this situation – in all instances where it occurs.
We must also understand that evil could lurk on both sides of the equation, where priests might well be unjustly accused.
I was a Catholic then and remain a Catholic now. I love the Church and I will not let the all too human failings of man color my understanding of the truth and authority that is Christ’s Church.
May I say that the reader shows a remarkably healthy and balanced perspective on the subject. I am certain that it has been a painful cross for him, but it is a cross that he appears to have born well.
It has long struck me that one of the most important parts of recovering from a personal tragedy (whatever the tragedy may be) is internalizing the resolution: "As bad as this tragedy was, I am not going to allow it to wreck my life." It sounds to me like the reader has internalized this.
My hat’s off to him.
This Thanksgiving, one thing I’m thankful for is the witness of this reader & the courage, so willingly displayed, that should be an inspiration to us all! May God richly bless this reader!
Amen!
The problem is that Priests, Brothers and Sisters are supposed to be a step above the rest of us. Apparently not!!!!
25-50% of the Priesthood is reported to be homosexual. How did this happen??
Realist-
The short answer is that it DIDN’T happen.
Those numbers are wildly exaggerated.
Realist,
“The problem is that Priests, Brothers and Sisters are supposed to be a step above the rest of us.”
You are confusing the Catholic faith with Albigensianism. The Catholic Church does not consist of the Perfect and the Believers. Both the clergy and the laity are called to be perfect, to be holy, to be saints. Are you living out your sacred duty, whatever thay may be? Are you a witness of the Catholic faith in your family and community?
Look at the case of fornication. All other things being equal, adultery is a greater sin than a celibate (cleric or single Catholic layman) committing fornication. Scandal is one thing, but let’s not forget that the committment of married persons is just as sacred as that of clergy or consecrated religious. Don’t pretend that your strawman is based on any Catholic teaching. Unless you fully accept the solemn duty of your baptismal vows (not to mention marital vows), then you should not be too quick to glee, er flaunt your “disgust” in the failings of others to live out the sacramental duty of orders.
The dioceses in America are infiltrated with homosexuals but it varies to a wide degree.
The percentage is perhaps the lowest in Lincoln Nebraska which is a magnet for othodox and faithful priests. I think Savannah, Georgia and Atlanta, LaCrosse and Madison are also low.
Dioceses where it might be in the 30-60% range
would include places like Albany NY, Milwaukee WIS, Los Angeles, Phoenix, Oakland,
San Francisco, Seattle, Miami and San Diego.
I’m a Protestant who is drawn to Catholicism. For me, the most disturbing thing about the sexual abuse scandal is not that it happened, because I don’t expect people to be perfect and I know that the incidents of abuse were relatively few. Heaven knows we Protestants have our own share of sexual scandals among the clergy. No, what I and, I think, most Protestants find most disturbing is the way the scandal was handled (and is still being handled) by the bishops and the heirarchy of the Church.
Peggy Noonan wrote on April 19, 2002, when the scandal was in its early stages, that John Paul II “. . . could begin with leaning toward a cardinal kneeling before him, thanking him for his long years of effort, and then removing and taking away his cardinal’s hat and ring. Thus showing the cardinals and the world that he will not accept the continuance of the calamity. He could start with Cardinal Bernard Law, whose actions have at least broken the spirit of the law. That would send a message to those in the church who need to hear it, that covering up, going along, and paying off victims is over. That careerism is over, and Christianity is back.”
To this Protestant, Noonan’s words made perfect sense; and I had hope for the Church when I read them. However, not long after she wrote this editorial, Cardinal Law was moved to an even higher post at the Vatican. This kind of action is the real scandal in the sex-abuse scandal.
I wouldn’t read Cardinal Law’s appointment in Rome as a “promotion” in any way, shape or form. He now serves in an essentially functionary role. It got him out of Boston and out of the loop.
Personally, I am utterly confused as to Cdl. Law’s actions. I had a lot of respect for him as a bishop– with regards to pro-life, he was not afraid to call a spade a spade, yet he still shuffled these perverts around without regard for his flock. I suspect he has a lot of time on his hands now in his gilded cage, and I hope it is giving him the time he needs for real contrition and penance.
ProtestantFriend,
Margaret’s assessment of Cardinal Law’s post as a “gilded cage” is correct; being made archpriest of a major basilica in Rome after having been an archbishop is, if anything, a demotion. He is no longer entrusted with the care of souls or the maintenance of discipline, both of which he failed in at Boston. He has no added authority or influence because of his position, either, particularly not since it is well-known why he came to be at St. Mary Major. Should Law have been given another penalty? Perhaps. But his current circumstances are not a promotion.
As to the main topic of the thread: I concur with Jimmy and others in admiration for our anonymous brother. God bless him, and make his example fruitful.
A few points of clarification that need clarification:
Al·bi·gen·ses (ăl’bə-jĕn’sēz’)
pl.n.
The members of a Catharist religious sect of southern France in the 12th and 13th centuries, exterminated for heresy during the Inquisition??
They got exterminated for believing priests should be a step above the rest of us??
Also with respect to “Cardinal Law”, is this a demotion????
from: http://www.natcath.com/NCR_Online/archives/122702/122702d.htm
“As a cardinal, Law continues to be a member of several congregations, the key decision-making organs of the Vatican, which handle matters related to the sexual abuse crisis. They include:
The Congregation for Bishops, which recommends new bishops to the pope and oversees the performance of bishops and bishops’ conferences;
The Congregation for Clergy, which handles clerical discipline and oversees the financial management of dioceses (including the prospect of bankruptcy);
The Congregation for Consecrated Life, which has the same responsibility for religious orders;
The Congregation for Catholic Education, which oversees seminaries and priestly formation;
The Congregation for Divine Worship, which handles cases of laicization of priests.
I too applaud the perspective of “reader,” in holding the individual responsible for his actions and not the Church.
I have often heard people say that they fell away from the Church for behavior on the part of a priest or sister that was much less than what “reader” experienced. But, ultimately they are only hurting themselves when they leave the Church over someone else’s bad behavior. I heard a speaker say not long ago — “Don’t leave Peter because of Judas.”
The Church is made up of sinners (admittedly of varying degrees) and religous are those who at leasst aim higher but may not achieve their aims. Sexual abuse is abominable no matter what the source — but what has been particularly troubling in the Church is the response to it — in particular leaving offenders in postions where they had ready access to additional victims. I hope that that is a thing of the past — and perhaps the Church needed this scandal to make it so.
I’ll take y’all’s word for it that Law’s being moved to the Vatican was a demotion. However, though I know we shouldn’t be overly concerned what the world thinks, our witness to the world _does_ mean something, especially in a situation like the sex scandal; and to an outsider (and I would wager to many in the RC Church itself), Law’s being moved to the Vatican sure looked like a promotion. Appearances sometimes–often–do matter.
I agree with you all, though, concerning the man who shared his experience and his perspective. May God bless him.
Thank you all, also, for being patient with me as I share my thoughts.
Realist,
As to the Albigenses: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01267e.htm. Note particularly how their moral code (section I(b)) was intertwined with their organization (section III).
As to Cardinal Law…I did not categorically state that his assignment was a demotion; I meant to indicate that, should one wish to put an interpretation of promotion/demotion on it, demotion better describes the situation. My apologies if that was unclear. His membership in various dicasteries, both according to the quote from NCR and to my own knowledge, preceded his being removed as Archbishop of Boston, so in that regard his status has not changed. Should he have been removed from those appointments? I do not know. I am not qualified to assign the penalty for the grave wrong he has done, so I will not attempt it.
Cardinal Law received what is known as a “promotion to oblivion”–a theoretically more prestigious position with vastly diminished responsibilities. Promotions to oblivion are used as a face-saving cover for moving an individual out of a position for which he is not suitable.
Jimmy,
I disagree with the “promotion to oblivion” with respect to Law’s new position in Rome. It was a “flight to avoid the might of the law”. And I wonder just how much the Vatican was involved with what appears to have been standard “universal” practice for protecting priests, nuns and brothers from prosecution.
Jimmy,
I disagree with the “promotion to oblivion” with respect to Law’s new position in Rome. It was a “flight to avoid the might of the law”. And I wonder just how much the Vatican was involved with what appears to have been standard “universal” practice for protecting priests, nuns and brothers from prosecution.
Cardnial Law is essentially under house arrest so to speak. He’s “grounded”. Don’t think of his going to the Vatican as a promotion, it’s not.
> It was a “flight to avoid the might of the law”.
I reply: If that is true then it’s still the responsibility of the civil law to bring charges against him anyway. I wonder why they don’t? Maybe because there is no clear legal crime on his part.
Kudos to your correspondent. He’s got perspective.
But I’ll say it again:
Everyone knows that Priests sin, this wasn’t the scandal. The scandal was the willingness of the Bishops and their subordinates to continually lie about it. It was their willingness to place other children and adolescents at risk. It was their willingness to blame the victims. It was their willingness to lie about what they knew, what they didn’t know and what they did and didn’t do about it. Acting together, they (but it’s not the Church, it’s just individuals..right, right, right? — Yeah, that’s credible.) continue to lie and obfuscate. They continue to lie about the “best science of the time” and the nature of the abuses and their own responsibilities.
As far as your last line goes: I only WISH I would’ve known that at the age of ten! What Brilliant Wisdom pours forth from you!
The brazenness of homosexualist priests is mind-boggling. Here in the Archdiocese of Boston the pastor of a Catholic Church in Billerica puts x-rated art he created on a Gay Activist site virtually bragging he is a Catholic pastor. The Church needs to be cleansed of “its filth” as Cardinal Ratzinger said. Yet to listen to some corrupt bishops the Vatican can be ignored as they further endorse the degradation of the Church through embrace of what can only be called idol worship of homosexualism. (In my book any bishop who publicly -or secretly– tries to undermine the Vatican on this issue should be relegated to the lowest regions of Hell as described in Dante’s Inferno).
Thanks for standing up, Deacon!
We need more like you.
God Bless You!
My apologies, that was snotty. I should have found a better way to express my disagreement.
The implication I perceived in your statement was that the damage wrought by a given event will only be that which is allowed by the victim. Garbage, and rather thoughtless, self-serving, burdensome garbage to boot. The fact is, some events will wreck your life and there’s not a damned thing you can do about it.
Bubbles, we don’t need your profanity. As for there being some things you can’t do anything about, have you ever heard of prayer?
Then feel free to leave it, Your Honor.
Well, yes, I have heard of prayer. But I’ve never believed it was meant to serve as my personal hotline to God to make Him do what I wanted Him to do.
Simmer down, folks.
Bubbles has obviously misinterpreted what I wrote. I said that “one of the most important parts of recovering from a personal tragedy (whatever the tragedy may be) is internalizing the resolution: ‘As bad as this tragedy was, I am not going to allow it to wreck my life.’ It sounds to me like the reader has internalized this.”
That presupposes that *if* you are going to recover *then* an important part of that is the determination not to let your life be wrecked.
It doesn’t mean that *everyone* can recover. Sometimes the asteroid hits you and that’s that.
It does mean that, *to the extent you are able to recover* having the will to recover is an important thing.
It is possible, though, for a person to dwell on what happened to them–or is happening to them–in a way that impedes recovery and makes their situation worse.
That’s an established phenomenon that psychologists have to deal with all the time.
“The fact is, some events will wreck your life, and there’s not a d—ed thing you can do about it.” I assumed that you were referring to spiritual healing, since that was the subject. God always wants this for us. If we sincerely want it,too, sincerely pray for it, and cooperate with Him, that grace will always be given. If He did not give that grace, He would be untrue to Himself.
Jimmy, you’re right. I think I did misunderstand. I thought I smelled “bootstrap xianity lite” and I despise that stuff.
Recovery from trauma, whatever it may be, depends upon one’s ability to integrate the event into one’s life. Not to “move on” or “get over it” or any of those other stupidities, but to make it a coherent, comprehensive part of who you are. It sounds as though Jimmy’s friend has been able to do that.