Eichmann in Philly?
In the section of the magazine that last month carried a story on an average Texas high school student who ended up becoming one of the most violent drug kingpins in Mexico, the Sept 15 issue of Rolling Stone treats yet another manifestation of the “banality of evil” that most of us have come to know as the “Sex Abuse Scandal” in the Catholic Church. In a horrifying, 8-page article, Sabrina Rubin Erdely chronicles the crimes perpetrated by the leaders of the Archdiocese of Philadelphia. Taking a page out of Hannah Arendt, while giving plenty of gut-wrenching detail regarding the crimes committed by priests themselves, Erdely focuses on the mid-level bureaucrat charged with doing the Bishop’s dirty-work — “counseling” victims, “treating” priests, and recommending reassignments.
[I couldn't find the article posted on Rolling Stone's website, and once it is posted, I imagine it will be only available to subscribers, so I'll give a summary after the jump. Though, I would recommend picking up the issue, it will also give you an excuse to dust off those old George Harrison records, as "the quiet Beatle" graces the cover.]
The “Secret Archives files,” to which Monsignor Bill Lynn submitted reports on all of the cases that he “handled,” were handed over to the Philadelphia district attorney piece-by-subpoenaed-piece beginning in 2002. The center-piece of the City’s case is the devastating story of a 10-year old boy who was serially raped in 1998 by two priests and one teacher at St. Jerome’s parish. One of the priests had been recently placed in residence at St. Jerome’s after being reassigned to do chaplaincy work at a local hospital on the heels of undergoing treatment in response to sexual abuse allegations.
All of this, however heartbreakingly and graphically described, is all too familiar. But, the culture of secrecy that rewarded the cold efficiency with which Lynn fielded and dispensed with allegations of sexual abuse in the diocese is the most chilling part of the article. Erdely quotes former Assistant District Attorney Will Spade describing the process of extracting information from the archdiocese: “It was like trying to infiltrate a racketeering organization. Most of these guys just seemed to be in the wrong professions. They weren’t kind or understanding or any of the things a priest should be. They were just thugs.” Erdely also gives a shout-out to Ana Maria Catanzaro’s Commonweal essay describing her dismay at learning how the archdiocese had manipulated the lay review board, which was established after the first cases of abuse were made public, by only making available to them the least severe complaints. Lastly, Erdely highlights that when it came time for Cardinal Bevilacqua to side-step claims that he was responsible, he knew exactly where the footholds were: “When he testified before the grand jury in 2003, Bevilacqua conceded that any move involving the reassignment of accused priests was ‘ultimately my decision.’ But he was quick to stress who was really at fault: In every instance, he insisted, he had ‘relied on my secretary of the clergy’s [Lynn's] recommendations if anything was necessary to be done.’”
As for Lynn, like any good mob soldier, he seems poised to take the fall for the whole conspiracy. Standing before the grand jury, Erdely reports, the judge explained to Lynn that he faces a maximum sentence of 28 years, but that in exchange for testimony against the archdiocese, the prosecution may offer him a plea agreement, which would present his archdiocese-paid attorneys with a conflict of interest. After several attempts to convince Lynn that he might be better served by an independent lawyer, who could be made available to him if he wanted a second opinion, Lynn declined the offer and returned to his seat looking “flushed and unhappy.”
From Erdely’s article it seems clear, if it wasn’t already, that the Church’s institutional structure has not only enabled bureaucratized evil in the past, but continues to shelter those who have been the direct agents of such wrongdoing. According to Erdely, Cardinal Rigali, Bevilacqua’s successor, served as the Pope’s “special envoy” to the Czech Republic this past April. Under Rigali’s tenure, the archdiocese began its ”Victim Assistance Program,” which, in return for help, one victim claims, pressured him to “sign an agreement that ‘prohibited’ the archdiocese from reporting the abuse to law enforcement,” As most dotCommonweal readers will know, Rigali will be replaced by Archbishop Charles Chaput on Sept. 8, but, Erdely reports, “the Vatican insists [...] that Rigali’s resignation has nothing to do with the scandal.”
I’m not saying that it’s time to start calling the Pope “the AntiChrist,” but after reading Erdely’s article, I’m beginning to see where Luther was coming from.
Msgr Lynn needs to answer under oath. ‘When you told the cardinal that two priests and a teacher passed around a ten year old for sex at St Jerome’s what did he tell you to do’
Maybe that question and answer will finally wake up the pew Catholics and make the abuse excusers go into hiding. I say, just maybe.. 2 to get 1… they will say forgettaoutit.
The novel thing is that Msgr Lynn risks being sent to jail, not for committing abuse but for his work at the chancery. It’s not one of the culprit bishops, but it’s a start.
A journalistic piece likening the Church to the Mafia isn’t objective reporting, Eric.
Eric,
I’m glad that, for the moment at least ,you are “not saying that it’s time to start calling the Pope ‘the AntiChrist.’” That clearly would not help further the conversation.
Anthony
Governor Keating of Oklahoma also likened the Castholic church to the Mafia when he encountered so much corruption while serving on the Catholic lay review board addressing the sexual abuse crisis. But that’s ok… I mean we’re all family -right? Let’s stop the madness and hold these cover up criminals accountable!
Well, it might be useful to remember that what broke the Italian mafia in New York and other places was when the justice system stopped participating in mafia adoration — and started handing out long jail sentences in regular prisons without benefit of special treatment. Staring at a long sentence in a maximum security prison has a way of concentrating a man’s mind on the cost and benefit trade offs of his criminal undertakings.
Analogies to a criminal (RICO) conspiracy may limp, but they are only limping slightly in the current Philly scene. I realize it’s hard for those who perceive the Church as primarily if not totally as the hietarchy to see the MAFIA analogy, but defensiveness or minimization do not advance things either, AA. Folks like Justice Burke who’ve been on the inside, continue to scold policy makers and get nowhere, but I guess that’s not objective enough.
The Lynn grand jury testimony was devestating -along with Bevilaquas.
What is reasonable IMO is that the kind of protect the institution thinking that marks these indivduals is quite common among our Bishops – and their defenders -and up the line!
A criminal conspiracy is as criminal conspiracy does. I have it on good authority that state RICO laws could be used against this stuff- and I see no reason why it shouldn’t.
As someone who has followed the situation in Philly as closely as anyone, I would HIGHLY caution readers about what they read in venues such as the Philly Inquirer and Rolling Stone. Is some of what we read true? Sure. But I would advise people to take what they read with a BIG grain of salt.
A LOT of inflammatory reporting has been based on heresay and dishonest arranging of facts.
Also: Bugyis wrote, “The center-piece of the City’s case is the devastating story of a 10-year old boy who was serially raped in 1998 by two priests and one teacher at St. Jerome’s parish.” Good grief. Whatever happened to adding the word “ALLEGEDLY”? Yes, people. These individuals may in fact be innocent.
If a student at a public school claimed that three different SCHOOL TEACHERS raped him repeatedly (ten years earlier, by the way), the case would probably never see the light of day; it would instantly be dismissed as ludicrous. However, when it comes to Catholic priests, far too many people are uncritically willing to whole-heartedly believe whatever they read. Am I outright dismissing this man’s claims? No, but as someone who has been reviewing this case, I am saying some skepticism is certainly in order.
I’m not defending any wrongdoing by anybody; nor am I some “conspiracy” guy. What I’m saying is that clear thinking has gone out the window. The fact that Bugyis – in a self-professed Catholic publication, nonetheless – likens Catholic officials to Adolf Eichmann and the Anti-Christ (?!) is proof of this.
-
Eichmann? Really?
This may be the first time that the indispensable Godwin’s law needs to be invoked after the *headline*
Andrew Greeley wrote the following many years ago:
“…many of the current leaders of the institutional
church are corrupt thugs, from the parish right up to the Vatican.”
Greeley repeated this in numerous writings about the church. The district Attorney agrees with Greeley and Keating in these words:
“It was like trying to infiltrate a racketeering organization. Most of these guys just seemed to be in the wrong professions. They weren’t kind or understanding or any of the things a priest should be. They were just thugs.”
The worst thuggery is when a thug is dressed in holy garments. Unfortunately, there are still the enablers, as a few in this thread show, who favor the Empire over the children.
Cathleen and Eric, the problem with tossing around RICO is that it paints the picture that the entire Catholic Church is a criminal conspiracy. I don’t believe that’s true. I wouldn’t belong to a criminal conspiracy. Having been a Catholic my entire life, and now, in the lowest-rung-possible sense, being a member of the hierarchy, I can report that the Catholic Church is not a criminal conspiracy.
If Lynn and Bevilacqua had some sort of criminal conspiracy, then prosecutors should go after it. If Lynn refuses to make their job easier by taking a plea deal – then they’ll have to work harder. But that alleged conspiracy says nothing at all about me, you or the hundreds of millions(!) of other Catholics who have had nothing to do with the enablement, perpetration or cover-up of sexual abuse. Personally, I’d like nothing better than that those who enabled or covered it up be rooted out of their positions and punished as justice demands. I’m just asking that we not to be tarred by the same brush.
Thanks to Judy L. for recalling Gov. Keating. His letter of resignation from June 2003 is worth a look today. His earlier Mafia-related criticisms, which he confirms in the letter, were aimed at some bishops with whom he worked, not all nor the Church. (His misplaced hope for the audits is also worth noting.)
http://nccbuscc.org/comm/archives/2003/03-128.shtml
In the same month, Marci Hamilton wrote calling for a RICO prosecution, noting differences and similarities between the Catholic Church and the Mafia. What has changed?
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/hamilton/20030619.html
Both the above are direct from informed authors, without journalistic intervention.
Marci Hamilton is a wild attorney who has done extensive work with the dishonest advocacy organization SNAP.
Hamilton’s work has also been discredited. Don’t believe it? Look:
“A Syllabus of Errors,” Michigan Law Review, 2007:
http://www.michiganlawreview.org/assets/pdfs/105/6/laycock.pdf
-
Jim, The reason that I bring up Eichmann is that it seems to me that Arendt’s claim that the Eichmann trial put the “banality of evil” on display involves two issues: 1) that evil does not always appear to us as monstrous, but rather, perhaps more often, seems quite everyday. On all accounts Eichmann was a pretty good, bourgeois German who was just doing his job, and this is the way that Lynn is presented by Erdely. He was a well-liked, suburban priest, who was just doing his part for the Church. 2) Institutional bureaucracies can contribute to the banalization of evil by creating a context in which committing crimes that from the outside would look heinous to anyone, appear justified by the internal logic of the organization. It think that it is incumbant upon us as Catholics to ask ourselves, in light of all of the evidence pointing to systemic corruption, whether the current administrative structure of the Church does create the conditions of the possibility for such a false consciousness. At least part of Arendt’s point, which made it so controversial, was that all of those who both actively and implicitly supported the institution, contributed to and were thus responsible for the evils committed by that institution. They may not have been responsibe for the specific crimes, but they were responsible for maintaining the structural integrity of the logic of the machine.
I have to question the rather absurd tone of this post. Having not read the Rolling Stone piece in full, I can’t really comment on that. The rest of this post, however, falls prey to the remarkably cliched way in which modern media has taken control of Hannah Arendt’s initial phrase “the banality of evil.” The Vatican was hardly rewarding Cardinal Rigali by sending him as the papal delegate to the Czech Republic. In fact, if the secular media — the Philadelphia Inquirer, the Associated Press, Rolling Stone, Philadelphia Magazine — had even the least bit of insight into the functioning of the institutional Church they would have recognized that Cardinal Rigali’s being named the papal delegate was of absolutely no consequence given that he was the papal legate on a trip to celebrate the 200th anniversary of the birth of St. John Neumann (who was once Bishop of Philadelphia and was buried in the city). It amounted to reading a papal telegram at a Mass or some other celebration — hardly a high level task.
All in all, the tone of this post reflects a mentality that encourages the damnation of any priest accused of sexual abuse — whether credible or not. And that — while not of the magnitude of abuse itself — is a tragedy as well. It’s a tragedy almost insisted upon by the bishops and the media as a way to escape or assign blame. It’s no small wonder that people are in seminaries at all these days. While we can never fail to acknowledge the victims of sexual abuse and the failure to properly address it by the hierarchy, so-called investigative journalism that turns over nothing new but only recapitulates the events as a way of bringing about further anger brings us no closer to a solution than we were 8 or 9 years ago.
The “Antichrist?” Really? How about the fact that the current Pope strenuously objected to the way that the Secretary of State under John Paul II was handling sexual abuse cases and strongly urged JP2 to tighten the rules and grant the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith competency over the cases.
As to Luther being right, well, let’s not even get started because that amounts to polemic — and that will help no one and solve no problems.
The key to me is where the mafia suggestion comes in. I’ll grant you the negligence of the hierarchy and the need for reform as regards this type of thing, but play at your reader’s level. We’re all smart people, we don’t need you to suggest that Msgr. Lynn is a mafia soldier because at the end of the day, guilty or not, he’s a priest, and to lead your readers down the path that the Church is a bunch of mafia hoodlums is insulting. Mr. Spade, the erstwhile assistant district attorney, is insulting enough, via the mere act of suggestion or implication, to the great many priests who do good work in serving God and his people that you need not assist him.
A disappointing post from what is otherwise an excellent publication.
Lest we forget, Eichmann was a committed Nazi, a war criminal, and an architect of the Holocaust. In 1945 he boasted “I will leap into my grave laughing because the feeling that I have five million human beings on my conscience is for me a source of enormous satisfaction.”
Anyone who has attentively read the 2005 and 2011 Grand Jury Reports from Philadelphia would know that the phrase “the banality of evil” sums up the self serving direction of the Philadelphia hierarchy in the matter of the sexual abuse of minors by clerics. Our overwhelming dilemma at present is the powerful impasse over all of this we have come to in the universal church. With the hierarchs unprepared to acknowledge and atone for their complicity, a paralysis of rage has overtaken us and it is a very dark time.
Jim Pauwels, it is possible that the Catholic Church is not, on the local level, a criminal conspiracy: but when elements of criminal conspiracy have been operating on a large scale at high levels for years, when they have not been dealt with effectively by the power structure (in this case, the Vatican), and when they cannot be dealt with effectively by the membership of the organization (the laity) due to the fact that the membership has no power to effect change, it’s hard to make an outsider see the difference between “church as criminal conspiracy” and “church in which multiple criminal conspiracies operate with apparent impunity until called out by forces outside the institution.” The line gets finer every time another such conspiracy comes to light and the people responsible are not removed from the organization but are sheltered or even promoted.
The line of reasoning that says, “My church not a criminal conspiracy because I have not seen this personally and I wouldn’t be part of one” denies the pattern of criminality and coverup that first started coming to light in the early 80s, has been shown to exist in multiple places at high levels, and is unfolding yet again in Kansas City. The question, “Could there be a criminal conspiracy (or many of them) higher up in the organization, how high does it go, and what does that mean for my participation?” is an extremely painful one, but the facts make it necessary.
Certainly innocent people should not be blamed for crimes they did not commit: also, the virtue of the innocent (and powerless) cannot be used to deny the criminality that occurs higher up.
” We’re all smart people, we don’t need you to suggest that Msgr. Lynn is a mafia soldier because at the end of the day, guilty or not, he’s a priest, and to lead your readers down the path that the Church is a bunch of mafia hoodlums is insulting. ”
Mr. Kerns,
You just set up a great big straw man. In all the years I’ve been coming to this blog not once, not even once, has anyone even vaguely suggested that because some bishops and priests are guilty of crimes that all of them are. It is your accusation that we have insulted all the priests and bishops that is insulting. Cut it out.
Please tell us this: why in the world is the fact that “at the end of the day” Msgr. Lynn is a priest have anything to do with whether or not he he ought to be criticized? Are priests not capable of serious evil? And if a priest has done evil to a child should we not condemn his behavior? OR should we just whisper our condemnations among ourselves, perhaps? IF so, how does that serve the Church, specifically the children? It was silence that aggravated this whole horrible mess in the first place.
Just what do you mean by “at the end of the day”? That there are limits to the truths we should tell about the clergy? When Pope Benedict urges us to fraternal correction, should we except the priests and bishops? Are they beyond criticism?
That is the issue you should be thinking about — not whether or not some lay people are severely criticizing some of the clergy. Or should only clergy criticize clergy? Or should only the District Attorneys criticize them? Or juries? Or presiding judges? I mean: should the alleged crimes not be called crimes when the evidence even before trial points unequivocally to profound guilt?
Let me suggest that if you have not read some of the official documents over at bishops accountability,, including testimonies under oath by bishops and in this case Msgr. Lynn, you are not competent to reject criticism of them. Those documents are not petty gossip nor are they the product of the bile of prejudiced journalists (yes, there are some such journalists). They are the words of the accused themselves.
To clarify my opinion: To call Law, Mahoney, Bevilaqua Rigali and Msgr. Lynn “Eichmann” IS too much. They do not have the blood of 6 million people on their hands. The Holocaust was perhaps the worst set of crimes in human history, and it should not be minimized either.
Nevertheless, there are analogies between the structure of the Nazi regime and the Catholic hierarchy — an absolute leader, operational power vested in a group super-loyal to the leader, a code of silence, no sure way of challenging the leadership, no secure legal rights of self-defense for dissenters.
Face it — the list is long and profound. The Church is very, very sick.
May I suggest it is time to get educated. Please take some time and read the grand jury testimony and inquiry reports.
http://www.bishop-accountability.org/legal/Commonwealth_v_Lynn/2011_07_22_Commonwealth_OmnibusResponse.htm
and..
http://www.bishop-accountability.org/statements/2011_09_03_McKiernan_Vatican_Cloyne_Response.htm
And to all the thousands of clergy abuse victims who are suffering, are hearts are with you.
Judy Jones, SNAP Midwest Associate Director,USA, 636-433-2511
snapjudy@gmail.com
“Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests” and all clergy.
Ann – If you want to talk about “straw men,” where in the world did Mr. Kerns say that Msgr. Lynn could not be criticized?
-
I guess it was only a matter of time before Judy Jones of SNAP showed up here, doing her thing.
Meanwhile, what do people really know about SNAP? The facts may surprise you!
http://www.themediareport.com/topic-SNAP/index.htm
-
“when elements of criminal conspiracy have been operating on a large scale at high levels for years, when they have not been dealt with effectively by the power structure (in this case, the Vatican), and when they cannot be dealt with effectively by the membership of the organization (the laity) due to the fact that the membership has no power to effect change, it’s hard to make an outsider see the difference between “church as criminal conspiracy” and “church in which multiple criminal conspiracies operate with apparent impunity until called out by forces outside the institution.” ”
catarinasdaughter – the line is extraordinarily easy to see from the inside, and many millions of Catholics in the US manage it every Sunday. If those outside the church are having a difficult time making the distinction, then surely it is incumbent on us who are inside to help them. It is the opposite of helpful to blur the distinction. Why would any Catholic, or any person of good will, wish to make such an important distinction less than clear?
Cathleen Kaveny 09/06/2011 – 11:21 am :
Cathleen, you’re a lawyer, so you know much more about this stuff than most of us, but it seems to me that a huge number of things qualify as criminal conspiracies today that didn’t used to and probably shouldn’t. Just qualifying as eligible for RICO doesn’t mean you’re a member of the Mafia or even a bad person. The world of institutions is a mine field, in which highly priced lawyers are needed in great numbers to sweep for danger ahead of even the most moral and ethical actors.
DPierre –
By saying “at the end of the day, guilty or not, he is a priest” Mr. Kerns indicates that being a priest should protect him from criticism EVEN if the priest is guilty. However, I did ask just what he meant by that in case I misunderstood his meaning.
You miss mypoint. The issue I’m addressing is whether or not the laity and others should criticize the clergyi. The guilt of the aforementioned prelates is presented by their own words in the legal documents to which I referred.
As for Judy Jones, whether or not she is a competent critic has nothing to do with whether or not those documents need to be read. Your comment is a red herring.
1. Ann Olivier wrote, “By saying ‘at the end of the day, guilty or not, he is a priest’ Mr. Kerns indicates that being a priest should protect him from criticism EVEN if the priest is guilty.”
I disagree. I don’t think he indicated or implied that at all.
2. My Judy Jones remark was made separately of anything else.
Thank you.
“The world of institutions is a mine field, in which highly priced lawyers are needed in great numbers to sweep for danger ahead of even the most moral and ethical actors.”
Oh, wow, David S, this is a real gem of a diversionary tactic :-) The breadth of the accusation is simply awesome. One could spend three lifetimes trying to prove or disprove whether or not it’s really true.
“2) Institutional bureaucracies can contribute to the banalization of evil by creating a context in which committing crimes that from the outside would look heinous to anyone, appear justified by the internal logic of the organization. It think that it is incumbant upon us as Catholics to ask ourselves, in light of all of the evidence pointing to systemic corruption, whether the current administrative structure of the Church does create the conditions of the possibility for such a false consciousness. ”
Yes. Bureaucracies are prone to the sort of thinking and operating you describe. Yes, it’s true of the Cosa Nostra. It’s true of the Catholic Church. It was true of Enron. It’s true of the Obama White House. It’s true of not-for-profit magazines. It’s true of your local bank and hospital. It’s even true of Christian denominations who congratulate themselves for avoiding Rome-style bureaucracy. In short, it’s true of *any* organization that requires a bureaucracy to maintain itself.
Whatever the answer is to the ills that beset the various bureaucracies in the Catholic church, smashing the bureaucracy is not the answer. The answer is to fix what’s wrong within the bureaucracy. It might mean disciplining, firing and/or prosecuting individuals. It might mean more transparency and accountability. It might mean more robust controls, and better checks and balances. It might mean flattening the org structure. Organizational theory gives us all sorts of remedies. Let’s pursue those thoughtful, proven strategies to fix what’s wrong.
“At least part of Arendt’s point, which made it so controversial, was that all of those who both actively and implicitly supported the institution, contributed to and were thus responsible for the evils committed by that institution.”
As soon as you lump “The Philadelphia Archdiocese” and “the Vatican” under the same umbrella of “the institution”, you’ve already introduced a level of simplicity that deviates from reality. Certainly, it’s an error with a lot of appeal, if one is a plaintiff’s attorney, but it is an error nonetheless. (catarinasdaughter makes the same error). The Philadelphia Archdiocese is a separate entity from the church in Rome – in communion with Rome, to be sure, but it is its own self-contained entity. The Philadelphia chancery was perfectly capable of committing whatever misdeeds it committed without any aid or support from Rome – or from New York or Chicago or Khartoum or any other local church. It’s a local problem that should be dealt with locally. I’m going to continue to support my local church, secure in the knowledge that doing so has no bearing whatsoever in whatever goes on in Philadelphia.
“The Philadelphia Archdiocese is a separate entity from the church in Rome – in communion with Rome, to be sure, but it is its own self-contained entity.”
Jim P. –
Thanks for an excellent post == excepting the statement above. It is pregnant with theological and practical difficulties which need attention, about 20 more threads worth of attention.
(But I”m going to remember you said this if you ever indulge in the sort of talk the Vatican indulges in when it talks about a “subsistent” Church distinct from the individual dioceses and members which comprise it :-)
Is this a helpful post? What’s to be gained by comparing Msgr. Lynn to Eichmann? Of course one must raise questions about his role in the scandal, proceeding from the public record. But he will have his day in court. As will accused abusers. Better to wait for those results before playing the Nazi-comparison card.
It’s just as sloppy to imply that the pope had a direct role in the failures of Philadelphia’s bishops and diocesan leadership. We don’t know why it took so long for Rigali to be retired. Presumably his long and influential tenure on the Congregation for Bishops had something to do with it. But I seriously doubt the pope had direct knowledge of the disaster over which Rigali and his predecessor presided. So we can sleep well knowing the pope falls well shy of being the anti-Christ.
From your summary, Eric, it sounds like the Rolling Stone piece adds almost nothing to the story. Is the line about Rome’s failure to acknowledge the real reason for Rigali’s retirement supposed to be a bombshell of a walkaway? Is that disingenuous? Of course. But only someone who knows nothing about the language of the diplomatic corps would believe she’d discovered just what she needed to conclude her blockbuster. I wonder if she knows much else about her subject.
As with Cloyne, one of the major pushes is to insulate responsibility of Rome from responsaibiliyu atr the (arch)diocesan level.
As with cCoyne, it’s simple to focus on plaintiff’s attorney and not the”gimlet eye” of Vatican (canon) attorneys and those who represent them.
Beauracracies can easily fall into ineptitude. but that’s not the same as “criminal banalization.”
BTW, Jim, how did the Obama White house get conflated with Enron in your list -a bit polotical?
And while we are at it, could you tell me how the Archdioces of Chicago doesn’t take its marching orders from Rome? If theu don’t maybe they’d get a “visitation.” I realize Cosa Nostra would have another name for their persusaion.
I also want to second Ann’s comment that the whole Church or all priests/religious, etc. are being painted with an ugly brush – that’s a major cop out
“Eichmann? Really?”
Yes, it is a stretch! We know it is hard to talk about what we sometimes can’t talk about or what our language will or won’t allow us to say accurately; but to pair Lynn with Eichmann, the Nazi automaton, who mindlessly and arbitrarily carried out at his desk his orders to murder millions of undifferentiated men, women and children, is over the top. Lynn wasn’t mindlessly and arbitrarily ordering the killing of millions of undifferentiated victims. The victims had identities and one can’t avoid or ignore the intent on Lynn’s part (however bad) as we try to understand the coexistence of opinions, judgments, insights, data, and policies surrounding this case.
Sexual abuse anywhere is awful, immoral; and owing to the ABSENCE of men and women — family members, teachers, clerics — who think of victims first (over an institution’s image or family’s image) is evil. But it is evil because of an absence or lack or dearth of good people, adequate oversight, not because families, schools and churches are evil as such (or replicas of Nazi institutions).
I am just grateful that so many are awakening to the true nature of a significant swath of Catholic hierarchy and their administrators. Not every single one naturally, but enough to have brought us the greatest scandal in American Catholicism that costs untold lives and about $2 billion so far.
I remember vividly a Justice Department official telling me of the consistency across dioceses of bishops’ responses of child endangerment and obstruction of justice. It was startling to him that no matter the part of the country, the pattern is the same. Is that simply coincidence?
Thanks mostly to distortions of the First Amendment, statutes of limitation, and earlier weak laws, those bishops got away with everything.
Jim P, yes support those who do good, but Cardinal George’s disgraceful, arrogant record, that directly resulted in more children being abused; and his breaking the IL reporting statute (discovered too late) help show the breadth of the problem in your area. Are Chicago and Phila really so different? What about Msgr. (forget his name) who coached an abuser how to finesse the police, and is since promoted?
Let’s look at Mahony’s record in LA, Law in Boston, Pilla in Cleveland, Christian in NH, Rodimer in NJ, and countless others (my brain crashes at the number), and this is no “these are the exceptions” issue.
The incentives and practices in the clerical culture around secrecy for instance are not limited geographically. The US, Australia, Ireland, Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, Austria, Chile, Malta, Mexico, India, Italy, Kenya — how many countries are on bishop-accountability.org? — and the same playbook exists. I shudder at the thought of exploitation in third world countries where legal systems offer little support to victims, and traditional deference to clergy flourishes.
There is something very rotten in far more than Denmark. I believe if DA’s in every state did the work that Phila’s DA did, the results would be remarkably similar. If anything, Jason Berry’s exhaustive research at the Vatican shows us corruption there as well.
The Holy See’s slick diplomacy that parses, denies, evades, qualifies, and strains the gnats of liability fools many. Like grabbing a fistful of eels, we get a surreal landscape that fails to enjoin real situations, in favor of word fog at its highest (or lowest) level. Penetrating that veil is a hard-won achievement.
I agree the Nazi comparison inflates rhetoric. Though patterns of conduct may have parallels, its inflammatory nature detracts from the effectiveness of the evidence, which is powerful enough on its own.
I agree the the Nazi comparison is over the top.. however the mafia comparison has roots in that the Mafia structure was imitative of the Church. The oath of obedience/loyalty while holding a burning holy card in your hands invokes Catholic imagination ..yes?
Not every Catholic layperson or cleric is part of the criminal conspiacy anymore than every NJ Italian is a part of the Mafia. RICO is a federal tool and J Edgar Hoover never would let the FBI investigate the mafia, Left it to local DAs. But Mafia was interstate and dodged local DAs and florished until the post-Hoover FBI rooted out the leaders. We need a Federal investigation of clergy abuse because it is interstate just like the mafia. The only known Fed. investigation was the calling of a Fed Grand jury in LA but it never ‘reported’ in conclusion re. LA Archdiocese or C. Mahony.
“I also want to second Ann’s comment that the whole Church or all priests/religious, etc. are being painted with an ugly brush – that’s a major cop out”
Let’s recall how the Mafia in NYC early on arranged for fake Italian American rallies in Columbus in order rally some PR for themselves by making their claim that the ‘Whole Italian community will down with them. It was a losing strategy then so let’s not use it on this thread i.e. stupid defense ‘if you accuse some bishops then all Catholics will be tarred with the ugly brush.’
.
Jim, thanks for your comments.
To your first point, I agree that any organization can suffer from a kind of “group think,” but that is why in most spheres there are independent checks in place to guard against the kinds of rationalized evil that tend to arise when fallen humans get together to justify their actions. In this case, however, it is precisely because there were no such checks in place that the probem persisted and is still not being properly addressed within the institution. With all of the organizations you mention, except he Cosa Notra, there are independent regulatory bodies in place to oversee their activity, an independent judiciary, the SEC, the AMA and other accreditation agencies for health care fascilities, etc. Even other churches have lay review boards that have the power to investigate, hire and fire their clergy. As far as I know, the Catholic Church has no such independent oversight at all levels. Thus, either “they” think that the Church is immune from structural evil or that there is no such thing.
This is related to your second point. You describe a level of colleagiality that, as far as I know, is very rare in practice in the Catholic Church. I know some university chaplaincies have lay executive boards that can fire priests that they have been assigned, but for most parishes it is the Bishop who makes such decisions and only with the approval (either implicit or explicit) of Rome. You might remember a NYTimes article that I posted on in April of 2010 that discussed a letter signed by then-Ratzinger rejecting the laicization of an abusive priest in California. So, the buck really does seem to stop with the Vatican, if not the Pope himself, even when it doesn’t.
The loose federation of diocese that you describe who are all in communion with Rome but maintain local, “self-contained” autonomy sounds more like the Anglican Communion than the Roman Catholic Church.
” But I seriously doubt the pope had direct knowledge of the disaster over which Rigali and his predecessor presided”
Grant –
My problem is that I simply can’t see how this could be true, unless his underlings simply don’t tell him what is going on.
However, I must admit I just checked out a couple of large Italian newspapers to see how the Philadelphia crisis is being covered there. Searching “Rigalli” and “Bevilaqua” I didn’t come up with one relevant article, which tells me that either the Italian newspapers aren’t interested or are they’re afraid to report on such Church matters. This is really surprising, when one considers that the major American newspapers regularly cover the rotten events in Austria, Germany, Australia, etc. If nothing else, such coverage sells papers.
So does omerta extend even to the Italian newspapers?? If so, then, given Carolyn’s experience, it seems there is no hope of the POpe’s being kept informed of what is going on. Sometimes I think the only thing to do is to picket the Vatican in St. Peter’s Square with signs telling the bare, awful headlines.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: We need to take the Vatican and local chanceries, turn them upside down, and shake the hell out of them!!!
But we won’t do it — for reasons I don’t have the patience to dwell on right now.
Labels aside, the behaviors of the institutional church speak for themselves.
The Church of Rome is sick, dysfunctional.
It’ll be a cold day in hell before I give any money or energy to this organization.
“And Jesus weeps.”
Grant,
Are you saying that if Lynn is found guilty, the Eichmann comparison goes through? Of course, I actually am not saying that Lynn’s actions are the same as Eichmann’s , rather that there are alarming structural similarities between the way in which Lynn could come to think that what he was doing was right and good and the way that Arendt describes Eichmann as clearly thinking that he was justifiably doing his duty.
Here’s the point about the Pope: Either he is in charge or he is just a figurehead. If he did know, then he’s responsible for the cover-up and should be held accountable. If he didn’t know, because he is so far removed from the local governance of the archdiocese, then why should we trust the Vatican to guide us on other “local” matters like who our priests should be and what marriages we should recognize as valid. At least if he didn’t know, but now does, he should be willing to release those Bishops who were directly involved in covering things up. Show me a Bishop who has been laicized. As a Catholic, I am extremely puzzled that more of us aren’t more alarmed to find that our Holy See is so blind, and I think there are a lot of non-Catholics who don’t get it either.
Also, tell me what knowing the “language of the diplomatic corps” has to do with expecting the proper disciplining of priests and Bishops? Maybe in Vaticanese representing the Pope in the Czech Republic is equivalent to being tarred and feathered, but I don’t think it’s unreasonable that those not fluent in the language would fail to see the punitive nature of such an assignment.
I think that if Catholics are going to start being accountable, it is the “outsider” questions that we are going to have to answer first.
Ann,
It is excruciating to get coverage in Italian papers. The Vatican definitely has influence beyond anything we experience here. At least, that is Jason Berry’s take.
Perhaps it’s something called willful blindness and conscious ignorance. If Benedict is not kept informed, I believe at this point, it’s his own bloomin’ fault.
Feeling the need to defend the Church by beginning with the phrase, “You have to understand the internal logic of the Vatican…” is what makes the Lynn situation comparable to what Arendt saw in the Eichmann trial.
One can have reservations about the comparison to Eichman. But the point is well made that blind obedience has generated a multitude of sins in the RCC.
DPierre,
Your blasting of Marcia Hamilton is way over the top. You should have one tenth of her advocacy for children. Your referral to scurrilous article makes your argument more specious is not downright cheap. Ditto with your attack on SNAP. SNAP was there when the vast majority of Catholics were calling the abuses inflated.
jesus wept
Eric,
You titled your post “Eichmann in Philly?”–the question mark apparently intended to lessen the blow of such a provocative headline, or at least to convey the sense that your thinking on the subject is not so outlandish as to compare Msgr. Lynn to a Nazi. Likewise, in your walkaway you let reader know you weren’t quite ready to declare Pope Benedict the anti-Christ. Good to know. Allow me to state categorically that I find comparisons to Nazis and the anti-Christ almost totally without merit in all circumstances. So yes, you went too far, and the questions marks didn’t help.
You don’t have to feel the need to defend “the church” (by which I presume you mean bishops here and in Rome) to grasp that this Rolling Stone author may not be as clever as you think she is. I am not justifying delaying Rigali’s departure–although it’s still not clear how much he knew–but what’s becoming alarmingly clear is how much you don’t. Rigali has been naming bishops for a long time. I would be willing to bet there was a protracted power struggle within the Vatican about how to handle this and when. Yes–imagine that–there are several influential curial officials who are not the pope. Could Benedict, with the wave of a hand, dismiss Rigali? Technically, yes. But there are currents of power within the curia that he would have to take stock of. Keep in mind, it’s been credibly reported that Ratzinger tried to accelerate an investigation of Maciel, but was blocked by Sodano–then one of the most influential members of the curia, now largely sidelined (although he needs to be removed as head of the College of Cardinals). Would that more bishops known to have enabled abusive priests have been shown the door by this pope, any pope.
And would that you show a little more subtlety of thought on the matter. Your willingness to implicate me in the banality of evil of the abuse crisis makes me wonder whether that’s a vain hope.
“…burning holy cards….”
So many things in Western Civilization are imitative of the Catholic Church but that shouldn’t convince you of their opposites being true. And when you sue the “burning holy card” you seem to be unable to reach the soul or kernel of the things — church and mafia — you are comparing.
I guess you want to frighten us with the ghost of the mafia in the church, minus a legion of saints and angels. They tried that in GODFATHER 3. But that was Hollywood, the center of US motion picture industry.
The Rolling Stone article is now online:
http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/the-catholic-churchs-secret-sex-crime-files-20110906
I’m not saying that the whole Church is a RICO conspiracy. But I think a case could be made that some members of the hierarchy engaged in one in Philadelphia. And I think prison is a great deterrent. I still wonder how much might have been different if Law had been prosecuted.
Ann, I’m excited that my comments are now worthy of tracking for future “aha!” moments :-)
FWIW – I don’t know enough about the RICO statute to know what qualifies as a criminal conspiracy. If Cardinal Bevilacqua told Msgr Lynn to do something illegal, and he did it – maybe that constitutes a conspiracy. If it does, I’m extremely skeptical that the web of conspiracy extends beyond the Philly chancery building.
here is the reason this type of thread will never die.. Jim P. you say ” I’m extremely skeptical that the web of conspiracy extends beyond the Philly chancery building.’
Hey man, are you saying you never heard about transfers of abusive priests to other dioceses, other states, other countries ..multiple times, to protect them, hide them , wait out the statute of limitations? It’s was in all the papers.. and you must have missed it.
In Marci Hamilton’s 2003 note calling for a RICO prosecution, she points out some of the major similarities and diffferences between the Catholic Church and the mafia, recognizing which, she presents her recommendation. She makes clear that there is no requirement that an organization be all bad or that its primary purpose be criminal. One intended type of RICO target is the legitimate organization in which criminal elements are acting. The all-or-nothing characterization some above fear should not be expected. Millions in the pews every Sunday are irrelevant. It is the hundreds or thousands in chanceries and other Church offices during the work week that become the focus. http://writ.news.findlaw.com/hamilton/20030619.html
The major RICO advantage is federal investigatory capability beyond what any local DA can muster against an organization that holds national strategy conferences, transfers personnel country-wide and internationally, and, as Gov. Keating put it, is known “to resist grand jury subpoenas, to suppress the names of offending clerics, to deny, to obfuscate, to explain away”.
DPierre (12:08 pm)
Your reference claiming that “Hamilton’s work has also been discredited” contains on its first page the statement by the author Laycock “[e]lsewhere I have praised Hamilton’s judgment, but this time …”. How did you select one of his opinions and reject the other? The fact of two lawyers disagreeing about something is hardly by itself a meaningful event.
Grant,
You still haven’t addressed the concern regarding the institution and the ways in which its organizational structure might be inherently flawed so as to preserve a culture of secrecy in which evils can be rationalized so as to appear good. Your references to mysterious “currents of power” and conjecture regarding what “protracted power stuggle” did or did not take place over how to handle instances of abuse and cover-up don’t give me much confidence that we’re in agreement with regard to the degree of transparency that needs to be demanded at all levels of church governance. How does one prosecute a “current of power”? I don’t think it should be surprising that vague appeals to internal political hand-wringing sound like a kind of wishful thinking on the part of the Roman faithful to the ears of the uninitiated. And what’s more alarming than my not knowing what I admittedly don’t know is your suggestion that such unverifiable hand-waiving counts as knowledge.
As for Nazis, AntiChrists, etc…and putting philosophical points aside regarding formal similarities that can reasonably be drawn across history between ideas, individuals and institutions, polemic is a rich tradition in theology, as my reference to Luther was meant to signal. So, no need to bring me up on charges of commiting thought crimes.
Is it a criminal conspiracy? The silence is, the cover up is.
I give you the most disgusting piece of pornography I have ever read. It is not from a magazine, nor a newspaper, nor a book. It is from a UK government report.
“It is hard to convey the sheer weight of the testimony we have received. It is impossible to resist the conclusion that some of what was done there was of a quite exceptional depravity, so that terms like ‘sexual abuse’ are too weak to convey it. For example, those of us who heard the account of a man who as a boy was a particular favourite of some Christian Brothers at Tardun who competed as to who could rape him 100 times first, his account of being in terrible pain, bleeding, and bewildered, trying to beat his own eyes so they would cease to be blue as the Brothers liked his blue eyes, or being forced to masturbate animals, or being held upside down over a well and threatened in case he ever told, will never forget it. But if it were one account it could perhaps be dismissed as exceptional—unfortunately adult after adult described their suffering as children.”
This is not just the USA, this is world wide.
Please take a moment to read the UK Government report. I hope you have a strong stomach.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199798/cmselect/cmhealth/755/75507.htm
The section I quoted from is # 51
Jack Barry rightly points out the ‘The major RICO advantage is federal investigatory capability beyond what any local DA ‘ In addition, lying to Federal investigators is a felony. Not so with the locals. Say hello to Martha Stewart, Scooter Libby, and about 100 white collar guys. Also the Rolling Stone article points out the Mafia/ Church similarity in showing the judge going to great lengths to persuade Msgr. Lynn not to be represented by the Archdiocesan [mobs]attorneys. Like a good ‘soldier’ he says ‘I stay with the Arch’s lawyers.’
But as Boston Feds who are experts in ‘turning’ know, that the clang of the jail cell door gives out second thoughts. Third thoughts, come when the cardinals are sitting in luxury here and abroad and don’t send birthday/anniversary cards. Here is the movie dialog.. “MY wife and kids are saying you guys are not giving them a nickel’ .
Wow, Jim I usually think very huighly of cyoru comemtns but this one–not so much…
“If it does, I’m extremely skeptical that the web of conspiracy extends beyond the Philly chancery building.””
It extends to Kansas City, to Orange, to Boston to Mnachester.
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/11/us/diocese-is-the-first-to-settle-a-criminal-case-over-abuse.html
Criminal activty in the chancery offices is pretty widespread.
http://www.kansascity.com/2011/09/01/3115771/report-faults-diocese-in-ratigan.html
How many grand jury investigations do we need before we can conclude a widespread conspiracy?
“…polemic is a rich tradition in theology…”
Hmmm, think I’m gonna stick that one in my pocket, and pull it out when the time is right.
I am very grateful to Michael Cowtan for his link to the UK investigation, and forwarded it to bishop-accountability.org in case it is not in its file.
The work of the brave Christian Brother Barry Coldrey on migrant children is well known
http://www.bishop-accountability.org/reports/2000_Coldrey_Integrity/.
There is a page on ba.org with links to most if not all the investigations done on sexual abuse in the Catholic Church. The user-friendly formats are a great service. Anyone interested in the breadth of worldwide coverage should take a peek. The service this archive provides is without peer.
http://www.bishop-accountability.org/AtAGlance/reports.htm
I go through waves of revulsion, and just have no patience for sentiments such as Dolan and Gregory’s about how this is all history. Yes, Prof. Kaveny. We need bishops in orange jump suits, not Roman palaces, before the message is truly delivered.
McCormack still says he did nothing legally or morally wrong as he prepares to leave office with all the honors of a retiring bishop in good standing. No deterrent there.
If this is true,
“Keep in mind, it’s been credibly reported that Ratzinger tried to accelerate an investigation of Maciel, but was blocked by Sodano–then one of the most influential members of the curia, now largely sidelined (although he needs to be removed as head of the College of Cardinals).”
Then I disagree with Grant. This is the Nuremberg defense, “I was just following orders.”
It’s inexcusable.
How exactly do you suggest Cardinal Ratzinger was “blocked?”
Physically assaulted?
Was he threatened with violence? Extorted?
What could have pervented him from using everything in his power to remove abusive priests?
Non-Catholics have a very obvious answer to this question. I’m sure you know what it is.
“I don’t think it should be surprising that vague appeals to internal political hand-wringing sound like a kind of wishful thinking on the part of the Roman faithful to the ears of the uninitiated.”
No, they see raw cowardice–at best.
“…points out the Mafia/church similarity….”
Here again we’ve got the STONES’ mafia ghost surfacing, as if pinned under God’s foot in some Hollywood chancery. Ed likes that drama! However, unlike a Mafia secret terrorist, who fears for his life and especially for the life of his family, Lynn, a celibate, has embraced his “fate” for a higher ideal. There is a big difference. Whether we agree with him or not, Lynn has already idealized his jail cell for God. (Of course, it remains to be seen if his ideals recede from him as he advances toward that cell.) But Lynn is not secret terrorist and I am sure he feels he’s doing God’s will. To put him in the same category as a mafia terrorist is wrong.
As for RICO, here is an article from the Wash Post in 2004 by a lawyer who worked in the White House on the Child Protection Act of 1984:
“If sexual abuse is systemic within a diocese, and the harboring of predators follows a pattern from the top, there are laws that can apply, namely the RICO (or racketeer influenced and corrupt organization) laws, which have been on the books for more than 30 years. Until now, it was hard to conceive of applying them to a church.
But consider Springfield again. If a group of clergy actually operated on the understanding that sex with boys was okay — as one of their colleagues recently stated — and if they acted in concert, protecting each other and destroying records as has been alleged by another of their colleagues, and if members of such a network committed two or more offenses such as sexual exploitation, fraud or obstruction of justice, then criminal RICO laws would indeed apply to that network of clerics and persons collaborating with them.”
http://reform-network.net/?p=2095 I should have included Springfield MA in my list earlier.
If only the US Congress and President would follow the Irish parliament’s example and that of Ireland’s Enda Kenny.
What the Deniers need to recognize is that while certain sorts of organizations are not evil in themselves, their structure, traditions and opportunity for evil by their very nature will *attract* certain sorts of people to them unless the organizations are particularly vigilant. For instance, police departments, though a good thing in themselves, will always attract sadists because police often have a justified reason to use force, even extreme force.
The situations are analogous for clergymen, teachers, and others who deal with children. Bad apples in their midst do not make them rotten too. But when bishops do not take sufficient care to prevent the victimization and scandalizing of those children, such inaction/action does reflect terribly on them, and for the children’s sake they need to be named for what they are and removed from office.
Joe McFaul –
What prevented Ratzinger from proceeding with a Maciel investigation was John Paul II’s decision to go with Sodano — he refused to let Ratzinger pursue the case. This is probably the main reason why many people think that JP II was no saint and should not be canonized.
Context and perspective may bring greater light. Jesus pointed out that those who know more will be judged more severely. Hence his blasting the Scribes and Pharisees. The history of the bishops is clearly a history of domination, with exceptions. No one who does not bow down to Rome will become a bishop except by accident. Ratzinger joined the fast track to the Church career ladder as soon as he left his progressive ideas. Paul VI continually told Hans Kung that he was looking for a sign, “un segno”, that he was joining the club, so he could be considered for the episcopacy. Ambrose, Augustine, Athanasius, Damasus,… these were all men into power and they abused it. Augustine okayed the use of force. Athanasius had people beat up who opposed him. Damasus became pope after 130 people were found dead of his opposition. They are the prototypes for the bishops. It is a failed modes and it shows. The pedophilia crisis helped make it crystal clear. Even progessives find it hard to understand this picture since all were “indoctrinated” in the bishop is the church doctrine. This is why we deny what is before our eyes. Thus centuries of cover-ups.
The bishops are not the church. They are part of it. They must be corrected when they fail to serve according to the gospel of Jesus.
James C .There are no terrorists in Church or Mob.. I may be for drama because they are both called family but using the word terrorist is pure fiction Like the overreach, Nazi, we have seen commented on.
“Non-Catholics have a very obvious answer….”
Joe Mc Faul,
Non-Catholics have their own problems of abuse. Protestant churches have as many abuse cases as the Catholic Church, if not more. And tens of millions of American citizens are victims of sexual abuse (dating back to when they were kids) owing to predatory family members, teachers, friends, etc.
Let’s stick to our own church. It’s bad enough that we are still dealing with generalities and the malleability “facts” and “events.”
“There are no terrorists in Church or Mob.”
Ed,
I am only going by the AMERICAN HERITAGE DICTIONARY definition of the Mafia: “a secret terrorist organization in Sicily.” In this country, one needn’t be afraid to speak out his or her sentiments. Lynn might be given to equivocation, but he is no terrorist, carries no gun, and believes in his own way Christ is the way to holiness.
Perhaps a bit off subject, but in speaking of Eichmann, let’ s not forget that it was the help of a Catholic bishop which got him out of Europe after the war.
“What prevented Ratzinger from proceeding with a Maciel investigation was John Paul II’s decision to go with Sodano — he refused to let Ratzinger pursue the case. This is probably the main reason why many people think that JP II was no saint and should not be canonized.”
I’ll peel back that next layer of the onion.
How–exactly–did Poe John Paul II “refuse” to let Ratzinger pursue the case?
Physical threat?
Extortion?
Excommunication??
There was nothing preventing Ratzinger from doing any number of very effective things–but he didn’t do any of them.
I don’t know if the Sodano story was true [I hope it's not true]–but if it was, the behavior of the entire curia is reprehensible.
Do people here understand how wretchedly apologetic they sound?
“But Lynn is no secret terrorist and I am sure he feels he’s doing God’s will. To put him in the same category as a mafia terrorist is wrong.”
No, but we can put him in the same category as Jim Jones and others who “feel” they are doing “God’s will.”
If the Pope is your boss and tells you not to pursue a project, how long do you think you’d last if you continued with it?
This reminds me of that mafia guy’s tomb in the Basilica of Sant’Apollinare :)
Ann, Help me out here. What do you mean by “last.”
I’ve asked by my employer not to pursue corruption or else…
Else what? I might get fired.
I’ll enjoy my new job with a clear conscience.
All I lost at my old job was a possible promotion.
So did Sodano pledge support for Ratzinger at the next conclave?
Because the alternative motivation you are suggesting is cowardice. I can’t abide moral cowards. I do understand greed and ambition, though.
Everyone feel better now, having wallowed in your ocean of enmity and rancor and bile?
Did you get it out of your system for at least another day or two?
In all seriousness, it seems that too many people take a perverse pleasure in going over this again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again.
We go over it again, and again, and again, because we keep getting told it is all better now, and then another bombshell hits.
Eric,
Have you read anything I’ve written about the scandal over the past ten years? I’ve addressed the culture of secrecy and the need for transparency. Many times. So has Commonweal. There’s nothing mysterious about currents of power within a large political entity. When you understand that, and you know the history of Rigali’s influence as a bishop-maker, and you have sources who are well placed and can offer insight into the process, then you might use that background to try to piece together an explanation for the delay in ditching Rigali that ranges somewhere short of Satan. I never suggested you could prosecute a theory. But theories help you understand what’s prosecutable, what happened, who’s to blame, and to what extent.
“As for Nazis, AntiChrists, etc…and putting philosophical points aside regarding formal similarities that can reasonably be drawn across history between ideas, individuals and institutions, polemic is a rich tradition in theology, as my reference to Luther was meant to signal. So, no need to bring me up on charges of commiting thought crimes.”
So you played the Nazi card and then didn’t quite call the pope the anti-Christ and we’re supposed to believe that’s theology? It’s not. It’s free association.
“Hey man, are you saying you never heard about transfers of abusive priests to other dioceses, other states, other countries ”
Ed, it’s an interesting point … but my assumption – which admittedly may be naive, and I’d welcome evidence that would remove the blinders from my eyes – is that the receiving dioceses, either through excusable ignorance or their own incompetence, didn’t know that the guy being sent to them was an abuser.
If there is evidence – not opinion, but actual evidence – if a multi-diocesan conspiracy to ship abusers around the country, I’d like to see it.
Joe McFaul, thanks for your kind words. I always appreciate your comments as well, not least because they are not only well-argued but also challenging to my preconceptions.
To your point – yes, of course, anyone who hangs around here as much as me can’t help but be aware of the flare-ups of abuse scandals in diocese after diocese. But that it happens in many places doesn’t constitute an intentional conspiracy, any more than 50 different wildfires raging in Texas at this moment constitutes arson.
Grant,
I have read some of it, and there’s good stuff out there to be sure. As I mentioned, even the RS piece references Commonweal. But it seems to me that there is often a thin line between exlpaination and excuse as well as between explaination and rationalization. I don’t think that processes can exculpate the actions of individuals or institutions. I agree with Joe McFaul. Given the amount of power, political and sacramental, that we as Catholics are encouraged to recognize in the Pope and other clergy, this crisis is about more than just abuse by some priests or even cover-up by some bishops, but it is about the viability and moral legitimacy of the institutional structure as a whole. Can Catholic ecclesiology survive this? That is a very open question.
As for the specific reference to Arendt’s Eichmann and Luther’s AntiChrist, I think I have already explained why I think that Arendt’s treatment of Eichmann is relevant and is not simply “free association.” I think there are very real and disconcerting similarities in the way that evils were systematically justified and systemic violence was ideologically replicated in the case of Lynn and Eichmann. If the reference offends your rational sensitivities, you’re not alone, plenty were offended by Arendt’s suggestion that there was anything “banal” about Eichmann, but that was kind of the point. As for Luther, his polemics regarding the abuses of priests, bishops, and the Pope seem quite relevant to the situation in which we find ourselves, and I believe that he also was aware that some of these abuses constituted a fundamental betrayal of the Church’s mission not only because of the lupine acts that were perpetrated but also, and more especially, the ovine clothing in which the perpetrators dressed themselves. This kind of behavior seemed to him and seems to me to be one of the ways in which the AntiChrist has been described by both scripture and tradition, i.e. a wolf in sheep’s clothing. I would be willing to defend that as in line with the tradition of theological analysis any day, as I would defend the reference to Eichmann as belonging to the tradition of political and philosophical analysis.
The miinister John Hagee was roundly condemned for his anti-Catholicism. Not so long ago many argued that he was guilty of hate speech. It was widely urged that all conservative politicians should clearly and vigorously disavow him.
But Hagee’s original comments would fit easily into this conversation. In fact he might be condemned as being too much too mild in his attacks against the Whore of Babylon.
“Do people here understand how wretchedly apologetic they sound?”
Apparently not. When you go out into the wider world, nobody cares about what currents were aswim at the Vatican to tie the Pope’s hands from doing the right thing to protect children from about known abusers. Nobody whatsoever.
The mafia isn’t a terrorist organization, it is a criminal organization and what unites it is a shared expectation of profiting financially and socially by participating in the various criminal acts — many of which are, of course, violent — for instance, killing people who won’t pay you bribes. Nonetheless, the hallmark of the mafia is not to disrupt economic foundations or sow widespread panic (as it is with terrorists) but to feed off of legitimate business activities like a parasite, or to control and protect black market activities (like drug smuggling) that are highly lucrative.
I don’t know Mr. Lynn, but I do see that in the Catholic church, the parallel is that many people, even those with good intentions, apparently went along with questionable handling of abuse, and worse, because of the expectation of career advancement, which probably takes on vastly more importance given their already having given up other kinds of benefits in life, like family.
All in all, however unuseful Nazi comparisons are, they are nothing at all compared to perpetrating a cover up — and thus perpetuating the continuation — of child sexual abuse. They aren’t even in the same universe of wrongdoing.
Joe McFaul –
By “last’ I mean he would not have kept his job, that JP II would have removed him from his position at least or at a minimum told the others not to cooperate with him. So why should Ratzinger obey?
I don’t have the facts but here is a scenario consistent with the the facts as we know them. Sure, he could have gone public, caused an international incident, but ot what end? He would have lost power and Maciel would have been in his same position relative to the Curia. (And you don’t think accusations for Ratzinger would have changed any of the Legionaires minds about him, do you?).
JPII was an old and sick man. There were few if any others in the Curia who were willing to take action (name one?), and Ratzinger’s firing would only extend the influence of those who would tolerate or even support Maciel. On the other hand, if Ratzinger delayed taking action, he could take action under the next pope (possibly himself).
History shows that in fact he took action against Maciel very soon after becoming pope. That indicates extremely strongly that he didn’t make a deal with Maciel.
But I reiterate: this is a hypothesis.
You might argue that the prudent thing to do would have been to stand on principle immediately and get himself fired. You might be right. But you also might be wrong.
“this crisis is about more than just abuse by some priests or even cover-up by some bishops, but it is about the viability and moral legitimacy of the institutional structure as a whole. Can Catholic ecclesiology survive this? That is a very open question.”
It seems to me that the viability of the institutional structure, and the survival of Catholic ecclesiology – whether the church can continue to survive, grow and thrive, and fulfill its mission – is a question of fact and history, not moral judgment. History suggests that the church has survived grave crises before, and despite what happened in Philadelphia in 1998, probably it will continue to putter along. The zeal of the Philadelphia district attorney, the pointed criticisms of the Irish Prime Minister, and all of the stories the Boston Globe or Rolling Stone ever wrote, in the intensity of the stress they’ve placed upon the institution, probably don’t come close to what the church has undergone in China and is still undergoing today.
Also, there is this: Jesus promised not to abandon the church. I believe him. One can note this without claiming that everything is rainbows and roses in the church. But let’s clean out the stables without pulling down the entire barn.
OOps —
” (And you don’t think accusations for Ratzinger would have changed any of the Legionaires minds about him, do you?)”
should have been
And you don’t think accusations AGAINST Ratzinger would have changed . . . ”
Also,
“That indicates extremely strongly that he didn’t make a deal with Maciel.”
should have been:
“he didn’t made a deal with SODANO.”
And the Church will ” probably it will continue to putter along.”
Jim P. –
The Church is NOT puttering alone. It is in crisis. The largest American denomination is now “ex-Catholics”. Ireland is doing much worse, and other nations are headed in the smae direction fast.
Get your head out of the sand.
Puttering ALONG, that is. Though if by “the Church” you mean the Vatican, then maybe that’s not an inaccurate description.
Ann’s point about many departures and the Church coming apart in many places like Austria, Australia, Germany, Ireland indicate we are in a period of IMO worse than drift.
Yet the current regme insists on no change .
Saying don’t throw baby out isa facile way of maintaining (a fortress structure growing in on itself) and speaking to an increasingly encapsulated world that wants it that way.
A significant cnytibutor to the ugliness of the sex abuse matter is the cotinuing structural approach that puts that institutional fortress first -whether you want to call it a corrupt enterprise or whatever label/
It needs change and change is what is resisted and supporters of the
“cclesiology” behind that are enabling yje problem to continue!
Bob N. –
So just how would you change the Vatican? (I don’t think it’s the Church, the people of God, are the big problem, it’s the Curia-cum-bishops.)
There seems to be widespread agreement that a big part of the problem is the basic structure of the Vatican (an absolute monarchy) together with its culture of silence which at best tolerates cover-ups and lying, and for whom the ultimate organizational value is the avoidance of scandal.
How to change it? Well, I’d call in some organizational experts to analyze the specific problems and make recommendations. Undoubtedly, the recommendations would include eliminating much if not most of the aging, obstructionist upper levels of bureaucrats. But the problem with that is: who would replace them? The pool of replacements, the company-men bishops out in the boondocks, are no different from the people already in power.
There is no normal sort of solution. We need a miracle.
Yes, Barbara, let us all acknowledge that comparing someone to a Nazi is nowhere near as terrible as molesting a child or covering up such a crime. (Much of the wider world doesn’t care about famine in East Africa either. So what?) And yes, Eric, let’s all admit that the sexual-abuse scandal has done possibly irrevocable damage to the institutional church, and some of its supporting ecclesiology.
But if you’re going to headline a post “Eichmann in Philly?” then your explanation for such provocative comparisons had better be bullet-proof, not buried in the comment thread. And you’d better figure out a way to explain yourself that doesn’t trivialize the unspeakable horrors of the Shoah. That’s what offends me about your limping comparison. It seems more like theater than analysis. And our readers expect better. They might appreciate a post detailing the parts of Luther’s critique that shed light on the sexual-abuse scandals. Instead, you used him as a punch line.
I won’t get into your own ecclesiology, which apparently holds that the papacy is useful only to the extent that the man occupying the office has superhuman knowledge of the workings of all parish life. Catholics believe he is the vicar of Christ, not Christ himself.
“The largest American denomination is now “ex-Catholics”.”
I’ve seen it said that the category “former Catholics”, if it were a denomination, would constitute the *2nd largest* denomination in the US. It’s certainly not true that the Catholic church in the US has lost half or more of its members.
I don’t wish to minimize the number of people who have left the church, nor to be insensitive to the literally millions of stories behind their leaving. But the fact is that the Catholic Church in the US continues to grow. There is a good reason for that: there is a lot of vitality in the church, and the church continues to the spiritual home for tens of millions of Catholics in the US. Despite the scandals.
Not being Irish nor Austrian, I can’t speak to what is going on there, except that every report I’ve been hearing, for decades now, about the church in Europe is that it was not well, long before any of these scandals arose. I don’t doubt that the scandals there are yet another severe blow to an already-severely-ailing institution in those countries.
“They aren’t even in the same universe of wrongdoing.”
Father Lou Gigante used to defend the Mafia (his brother was leader of one of the Families) noting that they are just like corporate executives who “kill” people by taking their livelihoods away along with other humiliations. We know that mental pain can be more devastating than physical. Yet we are afraid or unwilling to follow this in practice. The man who cut the young boy into parts is reviled by people. Even his lawyer is given death threats for defending him. Yet the bishops walk among us freely, even able to convince angry Catholics that abuse happens mostly among family members. As if that justifies what the bishops did.
Perhaps we are overrating the Holocaust and Hitler. Certainly the Crusades, and other events, were just as bad or worse. At that time popes were allowed to justify cutting Muslim heads off and even sending bishops with the troops. What about the atrocities of St Charlemagne! The Holocaust impressed us mostly because of modern reporting along with video and camp pictures. Jewish advocates resent any comparison because they do not want this most evil event to be just another event. Which makes sense.
Too many of us have bashed Voice of the Faithful, Snap. Women’s Ordination more than the bishops. Certainly the bishops are given more deference. Perhaps there is need for new language on the subject. Something that will get the point across more than is being done. That might be Eric’s largest contribution.
The crisis is severe because the church will keep on losing as the pastoral bishops are being passed over. Chaput to Philly, Dolan to NYC, Vaca to Santa Rosa, Finn to KC.et al… all hard liners. My city San Francisco awaits a new A/B.. The provincial bench has many pastoral bishops so, will we see if a hard liner comes for somewhere else as a continuing statement that a smaller purer church is still the Roman strategy.? Chaput just gave an interview to AP saying cafeteria Catholics can all leave now. [no mention of SSPX though )-: ] Philly Catholic HS teachers went on strike not over wages but Arch Diocese demand to hire part timers, a union busting tactic on Labor day.
“But the fact is that the Catholic Church in the US continues to grow.”
Mr. Pauwels, the Catholic Church in the US “continues to grow” because of the Hispanic influx. I would only guess that as these folks’ children and *their* children gradually assimilate into mainstream American culture, we can expect to see the manifestation of a smaller Catholic Church. Thanks to JPII, we have lots of “JPII priests” who will continue to be selected for new and vacant bishoprics. This doesn’t give me any reason for optimism.
“The pool of replacements, the company-men pool of bishops out in the boondocks, are no different from the people already in power.”
Ann, I agree, and that is why I no longer give my participation or financial support to the institutional church. It’s my vote of “no confidence”. The powers-that-be are counting on enough Catholics to continue giving money to support the status quo. Let’s not forget, too, that most bishops have enough money/land/buildings/assets “in reserve”, so to speak, that, if carefully managed, can tide them over for years to come. Not a hopeful picture.
“We need a miracle.” I think Catholics need to take direct action against their bishops via the parish coffers. It’s a starting point, at least.
Here is the link to the Rolling Stone article. I have not read through every one of the posts so if someone has already offered it I apologize for duplicating:
http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/the-catholic-churchs-secret-sex-crime-files-20110906
Sacraments are said to be central to Roman Catholicism, six for women and seven for men. A look at CARA, etc. for how many Catholics do what about Mass attendance, confession, Holy Orders, Baptism of newborns, and Catholic marriage is far more revealing about the state of the US Church than changes in total registered or the looks of any individual parish.
For thinking purposes, consider an assumption suggested by lengthening broad experience:
No combinations of embarrassment, bad PR, money withholding, walkouts, petitions, ignoring pronouncements, priest and lay reform groups, or grand juries are capable of getting through to those who run the Church to bring about significant institutional change. (A few lonely individuals may stand out as exceptions. How many can you name out of a few thousand bishops?)
The hierarchy, including Pope, are a self-reproducing ensemble with lifelong formation and mutual fraternal reinforcement according to the unique culture of the Roman Catholic priesthood. The values and priorities surrounding clerical sexual abuse of children that were called an American problem in 2002 have been found around the world from Austria to Australia. The ensemble is not unwilling to change – by its nature, it is incapable of doing so within a few generations. Whoever knows how to induce a miracle might start soon if the remains are to be recognizable 10 years from now.
Jim P:
Re: “either through excusable ignorance or their own incompetence, didn’t know that the guy being sent to them was an abuser.
If there is evidence – not opinion, but actual evidence – if a multi-diocesan conspiracy to ship abusers around the country, I’d like to see it.”
I could spend hours searching specific cases, and then I wonder if it would make any difference. The problem always is the nature of episcopal culture, its indirection, and the types of behaviors and code words used, such that nothing seems like it really is. Specific documents acknowledging, “we want you to take an abuser off our hands; he’s gotten too hot for us” are not to be found.
Yet everyone participates in the charade, never leaving that straightforward statement in print anywhere. Like trying to grab more fistfuls of eels…
The only thing I offer is Richard Sipe’s insightful paper on the code words used between dioceses, and that everyone knows exactly what is meant.
“CODE WORDS TO HIDE SEX ABUSE” http://richardsipe.com/Click_and_Learn/2010-03-05-code_words_rev.html
“If one is searching church documents for evidence of a church’s prior knowledge of sexually abusing priests he will rarely find the words pedophile, abuser, sex, or any other direct reference to actual behavior. Even in correspondence with medical providers code words and euphemisms are used. All of the euphemistic terms or phrases used to describe a priest who is sexually abusing minors listed below were found in medical, church, or criminal records.”
Read about the lie of feigned ignorance, and the culture of deceit: http://www.votf.org/Survivor_Support/sipe.html
Jim, it goes beyond excusable ignorance and incompetence to “willful blindness, conscious ignorance, and flagrant indifference” in the words of our former Attorney General in his planned indictment — before a plea deal was negotiated.
Carolyn ==
If those are NOT code words, then the bishops who sent out the abusers to other bishops are even WORSE individuals that they appear. I mean, if they *knew* that Fr. X was a serial abuser and recommended him to a fellow bishop, then that is even worse in my mind than if the first bishop informed the second bishop. If the first one had informed the second one, at least the second bishop would have been forewarned.
But I strongly suspect that those were indeed code words. Why? Well, if they weren’t, then the second bishops, the ones who unwittingly received known abusers, would have had justifiable complaints from the second bishops, and that would be reflected in the correspondence between those bishops. But such complaints don’t seem to have happened — we don’t find such complaints.
No, the evidence from human nature is that those were code words and both the first and second bishops were culpable, not only of moving the perps around but of lying by their use of code words.
Another Mafia /Church connection…[James C. won't like it] the Mafia had all sorts of code words to dodge wire taps. The FBI would have to give a glossary to jurors,
Also James thinks Lynn will be a ‘stand up guy’ and not implicate the cardinals. Does he really think that the three ‘mookies’ who passed around the ten year old are stand up guys too??? So when the mookies squeal, rat out, I guess Jim P. will get his evidence that there really is a conspiracy…. but maybe not!!! they may hope the three mookies will each do a James Cagney and refuse to talk. Any easy money bets out there?
Priests raped thousands and thousands of children. Bishops protected them and moved them, using an organized, consistent, world-wide plan. They lied about it, and got a billion Catholics to help them fight the victims. That is clearly organized crime, so they should be prosecuted like the mafia.
The difference is that the mafia has an honor code.
The difference is that the mafia kills mobsters. Catholic priests raped innocent children.
The difference is that the remaining Catholic congregation doesn’t care, and will defend the pedophile priest rather than defending the victim.
If the Anti-Christ took over the Catholic church, wouldn’t it be a great plan to drop the standards of a billion people so far that
- they didn’t care if priests raped children
- they didn’t care if priests lied about child rape
- they learned that lying was ok in the eyes of God if you were in serious trouble
- they learned that ignoring or fighting victims of child rape was ok
- they learned that keeping money was more important than paying for therapy for the church’s own child rape victims
If the priests, bishops, and popes running the Catholic church aren’t the Anti-Christ, they are sure making the Anti-Christ proud.
What Would Jesus Do? He’d be horrified at what the Catholic church is doing in His name. At least he gave us the Internet and social media, so that the truth can be preserved forever.
“figure out a way to explain yourself that doesn’t trivialize the unspeakable horrors of the Shoah.”
I agree. For a similar reason, I’ve never liked the blanket term “survivors”. Victims of sex abuse are victims. It doesn’t dial down the seriousness of sexual abuse to note that sexual abuse is not the same kind of thing as genocide.
“If there is evidence – not opinion, but actual evidence – if a multi-diocesan conspiracy to ship abusers around the country, I’d like to see it.”
Sadly, Jim, I think ther’s quite a bit of evidence but it requires a few hours fo reading soruce documents, such as depositions, Church docuemtns produced in litgation and witness statements. The key individuals appear to be the diocesan vicars. In diocese after dioces they transfered priests known to have “boy problems” (or the euphemism du jure) for sex abuse.
Results: The Diocese of Manchester entered essentially an “Alford” plea to crimnal child endangerment charges. That means the Diocese admitted that the DA had enough evidence to convict in return for an agreement not to prosecute and an an agreemtn to submit to DA to supervision of the Diocese for five years.
Boston–’nuff said. Who was Lynn’s equivalent at Boston? John McCormack, promoted to Bishop of Manchester who entered the infamous Alford plea.
Diocese of Orange—Bishop scheduled for contempt of court hearing–for sending his parochial vicar out of the country before completion of a damning deposition. Contempt of court citation issued to bishop was resolved when the bishop settled the lawsuit. A prior parochial vicar, wote a letter to a counterpart in England urging him to hire a priest, who had undergone therapy for molesting an 8-year-old boy on a campout. The child’s mother “has threatened to go to the police,” he wrote. The priest “is in jeopardy of arrest and possible imprisonment if he remains here.” That parochial vicar? Now a bishop.
Kansas City–destruction of evidence of child pornography being investigated by the grand jury as obstruction of justice.
Bishops’ handling described generally here:
http://www.bishop-accountability.org/resources/resource-files/databases/DallasMorningNewsBishops.htm
Quotes:
here’s just a small summary of examples:
Texas bishop hires priest in 1988 from a parish in the Diocese of Yakima, Wash., after a lawsuit accused him and another priest of molesting a teenage boy.
Michigan diocese hires priest deemed unfit for the Youngstown, Ohio, Diocese and struggled throughout the late 1980s to find another bishop willing to employ him. In 1990, Bishop XXX gave him that chance, although he knew the priest had molested an altar boy.
Bishop arranged a meeting between Bishop Keith Symons of the Palm Beach, Fla., Diocese and a man who had accused Bishop Symons of molesting him years earlier. During the conversation, the bishop listened as Bishop Symons admitted to the abuse, assured everyone that there was the only one victim and promised to get counseling. Bishop seemed satisfied, and Bishop Symons returned to work.
Phoenix -criminal investigation into widespread objstruction of justice results in another Alford plea and a famous windshield accident.
Patrick Malloy makes THE classical mistake to confuse the “Church” with “persons who happen to be Catholic doign bad things.” Hagee attacks the Church. Miscreant Bishops are not the church. Spineless Popes are not the Church either. Those of us who think that many bishops have obstructed justice and that most of the rest are spineles gutless creatures unworthy of their office are not attacking the Church. We are fraternally correcting those who sorely need it.
http://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=11631
Joe McFaul –
There’s no such thing as a conspiracy of one .Some of your examples as presented involve only one bishop or diocesan official. So how does that prove aconspiracy?
Yes, as you present them the Orange diocese, Michigan diocese, and Palm Beach cases do show collusion. So RICO might be applicable in those cases.
All those administrators were awful, but that doesn’t necessarily make them conspirators.
Joe McFaul:
Thank you, thank you for gathering the evidence. Some days I just don’t have the stomach for it anymore. Yes, it was an Alford plea, but wouldn’t you know the diocesan lawyer quibbled about a news report that McCormack admitted guilt.
Jim P:
The term “survivor” is very important to those sexually brutalized by priests because they desperately need to move on from being a victim. That self-identity as a victim is something they abhor, reinforcing the powerlessness they endured. Yes, they know better than anyone they were victims, but let’s offer a verbal reinforcement to their efforts to heal.
Institutional lying thrives. How can a bishop actually say the opposite of what an attorney general found, and no one bats an eye? I can’t wrap my mind around that. And the smoothness of it all! I’ve included the text here several times over the years, but here’s another go:
McCormack: The (audit) report confirms that the Diocese of Manchester has complied with the letter and spirit of the Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People, all articles of the Agreement with the State of New Hampshire, and the diocesan sexual misconduct policy.
http://www.catholicnh.org/child-safAuditety/reports-and-updates/response-to-kpmg-assessment-dated-011707/ (second sentence)
versus the TRUTH from
The Attorney General:
“Despite the substantial progress made by the Diocese, there are still some critical gaps and issues which need to be rectified before the Diocese of Manchester will be considered in full compliance with the Agreement or be considered to have a fully effective and sustainable compliance program…
The tone at the top, however, does not appear to be consistent among key personnel at the Diocese of Manchester… An improvement in the program’s senior leadership’s demonstrable tone is warranted.
Finally, it has been almost four years since the Diocese and the Attorney General’s Office entered into the subject Agreement and while substantial progress has been made, the Diocese is still not in full compliance therewith and more structural and procedural enhancements are needed to achieve full, effective, and sustainable compliance.”
http://doj.nh.gov/publications/nreleases/pdf/050407KPMG_Diocese_report.pdf p. 6-7
Auxiliary Frank Christian’s false statements to a court were to be the reason for including perjury in the planned indictment. A bishop and perjury, imagine. The AG talked about acting with a “consciousness of guilt”.
Lastly, here is my research on what bishops and priests said versus what the AG found: http://votf.org/Survivor_Support/truth_list.html
For me, it is a clergy lies list, though it is published as the truth the AG told. It was a huge task to research all those documents, but I remain proud of the effort.
The evidence is all around us.
Thank you for all your important work, Carolyn. There’s nothing like presenting the facts, just the facts. The children and the Church are indebted to you.
Who started bishops accountability? We are indebted greatly to that project. If only those with their heads in the sand would feel an obligation to look at the facts before they form ill-informed opinions.
“I’ve never liked the blanket term ‘survivors.’ Victims of sex abuse are victims.”
Excuse me, Mr. Pauwels, but that is not your call.
I was sexually abused throughout most of my childhood by someone close to me (not a Catholic priest). I survived what Leonard Shengold, M.D., calls “soul murder.” I am a survivor. The word is not trademarked for Holocaust survivors alone, and there are many points of commonality between sexual abuse survivors and Holocaust survivors. Judith Lewis Herman, one of the leaders in the field of trauma, quite literally wrote the book on complex PTSD (Trauma and Recovery). In it, she compares the experiences of Holocaust survivors, POWs, sexual abuse survivors, and hostages, and finds very similar experiences and effects.
I have complex PTSD. My life has been marred by physical and mental pain and the loss of many years that could have been productive. In spite of that, I am in a faithful marriage, I have not abused anyone else, I have completed more than one graduate degree with a 4.0 average, and I get up every day and do the work ahead of me. As a child, I was a victim. I have worked very hard to become a survivor.
Unfortunately, I have also found notable, consistent similarities between the situation in which I was abused and the Catholic Church, and I do not find the Eichmann comparison to be a stretch. In all three situations, I see the misuse of trust and the unjust use of power; the denial of the realities of abuse; the insistence that a person who holds a certain title is good no matter what they actually do; the use of euphemism to cover the destruction of lives; the willingness to sacrifice the innocent in order to protect the influential; the silencing, stigmatization, and retraumatization of survivors when they try to speak; and the insistence on institutional self-preservation over the actual mission of the institution and on ideology over ethics. Yes, there are differences, but there are far too many similarities. I loved the Church. I did not want those similarities to exist. I intended to make my career and life in the Church when I began to see them partway through my graduate work in Catholic theology. I did months of research trying to prove myself wrong, but that work and the ensuing years have shown the same dreary pattern of protection of abusers, denial, coverup, excuse, blame shifting, and window dressing, all going on unchanged in the Church. If it ever does change, I will be the first to celebrate. I believe Jesus said he would never leave the Church, and I also believe the hierarchy has not been faithful to Jesus.
Disagree with me all you like about the last paragraph, but do not attempt to define me; I will not define you. I am a survivor.
Are most Commonweal readers eager to see bishops and priests in prison? From reading these comments, one might think so.
“The mafia isn’t a terrorist organization.”
Barbara, blame Webster for changing the name of a group into a definition you don’t like! Maybe because similarities are more liable to definitions than differences.
“…unspeakable horros of Shoah.”
I agree. It is hard to imagine how a survivor of Dachau can rest on his or her being understood in communion or common with the tens of millions of citizens who were sexually abused when they were younger, when they were kids. It requires a rehersal of the most basic assumptions of morality, racism, and annihilative ideology. The abuse problem is held together by an entirely different set of conflicts and (conflicting) resolutions.
“The largest American denomination is now ex-Catholics.”
Ann,
No such creature. Ex-Catholics are either part of the unaffiliated category in polls or members of some Protestant church or non-Christian (i.e., Buddhist) group. They are no “group” or church or assembly. True, had they stayed, there would be over 100 million US Catholics (almost a third of the US populations) instead of 74 million. But the “ex” people have long since gone to assist the other hemorrhaging churches in America. (As has been pointed out, over and over again: though the Catholic Church’s retention rate is 70%, it is still higher than all other religions in America save Judaism, Mormonism, Hinduism and Orthodoxy, according the Pew Report and a recent CARA report.)
And Luther!
And how could we even bring in poor Luther, whose tract, “On Jews and Their Lies,” reads as a blueprint and carefully designed plan for Kristallnacht, a pogrom against German Jews (Nov. 9-10, 1938) which destroyed Jewish homes, synagogues, institutions and place of business and sent 30,000 (arrested) Jews to Dachau, Buchenwald, and Sachsenhausen.
In gereral, one always hopes some believing Catholic on this site will opt to pass though the surface of the abuse problem in search of divine meaning. Bishops and bad abuse policies are not in an inseparable cohabitation. How abuse is handled varies from diocese to diocese and from bishop to bishop. I’m sure some bishops are more uneasy about past policies than others. One can put bishops in two camps: reformers and reactionaries. Some bishops have a foot in both camps and are at ease in neither. But to put them all in the same category is not helpful and doesn’t take into consideration that they dispute each other for room and better policies to make kids safer. To confine all of them to the same irreconcilable framework as “enemies” isn’t going to help anyone.
David Gibson: I am eager to see abusers and those who colluded with them and protected them in jail. The fact that some of them are bishops and priests does not change the nature or severity of their crimes, nor should it protect them from the consequences of those crimes.
“…commonality between sexual abuse and Holocaust survivors.”
In spite of the horrible familiar hand (or school or church hand, or coach hand), a victim of sexual abuse has been dealt, it carries none of the weight of the Holocaust and the ideology behind the Holocaust. Family abuse follows unplanned patterns. However, there is no annihilative ingredient in such abuse that takes the form of wiping out a whole group of people (i.e., Jews) — millions of them — simply because they werer born as such. Nazi ideology always resumed its activities with the same sentence of death as if to insist on the inseparability of Jews and annihiliation. That never hung over vistims of abuse, in families, schools, churches, and other institutions.
David: What? Set up a poll or take a stats class.
David Smith, not David Gibson. The rest of the response stands
James Chichetto: I did not say there was an exact correspondence or a total identification between survivors of sexual abuse and the phenomenon of the Holocaust. I said, and research supports, that there is a commonality between them that reputable scholars in the field of trauma (start reading with Judith Lewis Herman; she has a good bibliography) have noted, and that the effects are very similar. Believe me, an abused child who has been threatened with death feels a real and justified fear of annihilation.
Trying to minimize evil by comparing it to other evil and saying “that one over there is worse” helps no one. The similarities between evils and the patterns that evil takes on small or large scales can be both instructive and a warning.
Family abuse actually follows very familiar patterns, patterns that also repeat themselves on a larger scale. Alice Miller, a respected analyst and scholar, has pointed out the influence of abusive child-rearing practices on the Germany of the 1930s. She makes a convincing case.
James C.-
Yes, it’s true that most ex-Catholics are not members of an organized denomination. But it is also true that approximately 1/3 of formerly self-identifying Roman Catholics and practicing Roman Catholics no longer consider themselves as member of the Church, though there are a few who belong to newly formed denominations calling themselves “Catholic”, and there are some who say they’re still Catholic, though not members of the Church and do not want to be identified with it as a group. I heard from an old friend just two days ago who is pretty much in that category. Sad, sad, sad.
You can complain about my use of the term, but it serves quite well to refer to those who no longer consider themselves members of the RCC. You can try to minimize the numbers all you want, but the figures are appalling.
Thank you, catarinasdaughter, for clarifying powerfully that you are a survivor.
I think you mean David Smith, not David Gibson, in your reply. There is a chasm of difference between the two; Smith being someone who consistently takes positions counter to the majority of Commonweal readers, to put it mildly. Gibson is a contributor and well-known writer.
Dr. Herman’s 1992 book, Trauma and Recovery: The aftermath of violence – from domestic abuse to political terror, is outstanding. I find this quote from the NYT review applicable: Dr. Herman is exquisitely attuned to what haunts trauma victims and survivors even more than the crime itself: the silence, the cover-up, the denial of the crime by the “passive bystander.” (I do not understand the indifference and silence of most laity.)
“As horrifying as are the sufferings of those who went to the torture chambers of slave labor and death camps of Nazi Germany, and the Gulag, of South Africa, South America and Southeast Asia (and the author in no way minimizes any of these unique and irreducible passages of pain), Dr. Herman also understands that chronic, hidden family violence is actually more, not less traumatic than sudden violence at the hands of a stranger, or of an enemy during war.”
“She demonstrates that after even a single act of abuse, physical violence is only infrequently needed to keep one’s victim in a constant state of terror, dependent on her captor and tormentor.” (to all those who say, why didn’t they tell, why did they go back?)
Much greater humility is needed before judgments about survivors take hold. It behooves us to listen, listen, listen….
I wonder whether Dr. Herman really, truly believes that or whether the reviewer just got carried away. Gulag, schmulag. You think being tortured to death is tough? I was an abused child! So there!
Mr. Smith clearly has no experience with what the violent death of love and trust does to children. That he mocks the situation saddens me but he provides a useful illustration of determined ignorance. I can only wonder at what fuels such ignorance.
” the insistence that a person who holds a certain title is good no matter what they actually do; the use of euphemism to cover the destruction of lives; the willingness to sacrifice the innocent in order to protect the influential; the silencing, stigmatization, and retraumatization of survivors when they try to speak; and the insistence on institutional self-preservation over the actual mission of the institution and on ideology over ethics.”
Every bishop and Vatican retreat should start with the above.
“I did not say that there was an exact correspondence…. Family abuse actually….”
catarinasdaughter,
To use the Holocaust as a means of giving truth to the horror of your experience makes sense; but personally I think it insulting to victims of the Shoah. Very few if any victims of family abuse (or any other kind of abuse) fit into the category of that kind of horror, which was genocidal. The horror of the Holocaust under the surface of European history has yet to be drawn out adequately; so much of it still remains inaccessible to our understanding and American experience. The closest we can come to understanding it is through our history of slavery and the brutality of that American institution.
Ann,
The figures are appalling for ALL denominations, especially (in the Pew Report) for the those churches most hit like the Presbyterians who lost 60% of their flock, the Episcopalians who lost 55% of their flock, of Pentecostals and Methodists who lost 53% of their flock, etc., etc. as it was for the Catholic Church who lost 30% of its flock. Fr. Greeley is more optimistic about Catholic losses believing many of the unaffiliated will return. Who knows! 30% is a terrible loss however we look at it as an index to the hemorrhaging in all denominations and the growth of the unaffiliated.
Molly Roach, I cannot say what any one person might be experiencing or the reasons for their actions. There are, however, patterns that apply with considerable reliability across different settings.
There are several defenses against the reality of evil; the ones I notice most often are avoidance, minimization, denial, distraction, and trying to discredit survivors.
Avoidance is the first choice. When it is no longer possible to deny the very existence of evil, the others go into play. They are used with varying levels of skill, but with consistent determination, because the stakes are high. People don’t want to believe. It’s frightening and it’s also demanding, because when we are faced with the reality of evil close at hand, a response is required of us and we can no longer be comfortable. It’s nothing less than the loss of a worldview, and that’s a big loss.
People facing the loss of their worldview are very frightened. They are defending their families, their churches, their countries, their life stories (which they equate with their lives), or their church (which they equate with their faith) from an alien viewpoint that includes things no one wants to face. This is entirely understandable, though the behavior prompted by the fear is frequently inexcusable. It explains how bishops could pass abusers around despite the fact that they tortured children (and yes, abuse is torture; just ask the survivors, or their therapists, or the social workers who deal with the cases that get discovered). It explains why people could live by the camps and claim they never smelled the smoke. It explains why a family will cover up abuse for generations while perpetuating it.
I am never surprised when people try to discredit or dismiss the experience of trauma survivors and of those who have given their lives to the treatment and study of trauma. It’s so much easier to decry evil in some other place or time than it is in one’s own. It’s so much easier to see the large-scale horrors as anomalies and deny that they could be going on in miniature right here and right now. It’s so much easier to talk about those monsters over there than to discover that someone you trusted has done hideous things.
catarinasdaughter, bless you for all you have done to overcome the horrible things done to you. Please know that I am rooting for you! (And I will pray for you, too).
I won’t dispute your choice in referring to yourself as a survivor. From what you’ve described, it seems to me that you really are one.
Nevertheless, I do dispute the *blanket* assignment of the term survivor to *all* victims of abuse. Your experience obviously was traumatic, in a way that wounded you deeply and permanently. Not all victims of abuse are wounded as deeply and permanently. You’ve implied that your life was threatened by your abuser – I can’t imagine how awful that must have been. Still, I understand that is *not* the case for many, presumably the vast majority, of victims of abuse.
With respect, even victims of sexual abuse have a responsibility to their brothers and sisters, and that includes respecting the experience of those who have been through an entirely different kind of trauma – those who have, truly and directly, *survived* attempts to *exterminate* them and their entire ethnic group.
By claiming that *all* victims of abuse are survivors, you and others who use the term are diluting the meaning of that phrase. That may not be your intention, but it is true nonetheless. You’ve cited authors who have identified some similarities between the characteristics of sexual abuse victims and genocide survivors. Again, with respect, I’d suggest that the chief difference is the difference that makes all the difference – that nobody was trying to murder victims of sexual abuse, their families, their neighbors, and their entire culture.
Let me state again what I stated in my original comment: one can note this critical difference without diminishing the seriousness of sexual abuse.
Carolyn: thank you for pointing out that victims of sexual abuse want to ‘get past’ their being a victim. Never having been abused myself, it is difficult to imagine what it must be like, and I’m grateful for your describing this aspect of life after abuse.
Frankly, I believe that victims’ advocates’ attempts to appropriate the term “survivor” is, at least in part, a rhetorical strategy designed to win the sympathy of prosecutors, judges, juries, the media and the public. In the US, people can refer to themselves however they wish, but I’m not obligated to approve of it nor remain silent about it. As you know, I oppose large awards and settlements that do little or nothing to roll back the traumatic effects of abuse to the victim, while punishing the innocent (parishioners who rely on diocesan services that need to be curtailed or eliminated because of the transfer of funds to abuse victims and their attorneys), yet do nothing to punish those who actually perpetrated and enabled the crimes. I don’t view that outcome as just, and so I oppose rhetorical strategies that help bring about that outcome.
If “victim” is a hurtful word, then we should find one that doesn’t diminish the experience of survivors of genocide, and doesn’t lend itself to encouraging large settlements that don’t result in justice.
“Are most Commonweal readers eager to see bishops and priests in prison?”
I can’t speak for anyone but myself. Speaking for myself, I’m eager for all perpetrators of sexual abuse to be justly punished. I don’t believe clergy should be exempt from the requirements of justice. If a prison sentence is what justice requires, then cleric perpetrators should be sentenced to prison.
In my view, part and parcel of ‘just punishment’ is respecting statutes of limitations.
These statements won’t surprise folks who have read my comments on this topic in the past.
Mr. Chichetto, you do not know (and I will not describe to you) the details of what I endured. I will only say that much of it was recognizable when I read the accounts of Holocaust survivors and of slaves. This experience is true of many other survivors and is corroborated by those who study them. I am puzzled at your insistence that such recognition diminishes the Shoah. It doesn’t for me. It only brings home the fact that human beings can choose to practice evil behavior, individually or in groups, anywhere and at any time, and that we as Christians are called to oppose evil, not to rank it.
I’m not replaying the “Four Yorkshiremen” sketch here. Human suffering is not a competition. Child abuse is not less destructive because it is not genocide. Genocide is not diminished when many of its techniques are practiced in secrecy and isolation, one child at a time. One kind of suffering does not lessen another. Nothing makes the need for justice and change less urgent.
Today the new Abp. of philly is gloriously installed. Nicholas Cafardi has an op ed saying forget politics and really work to install trust.
Personally, I wouldn’t bet on it for the many reasons given in this thread, and, at bottom, the need for institutional change all the way to the top.
Grant and Eric can argue semantics at 20 paces, but the ugly scandal lives on.
Bevilaqua’s appearance is unexplainably delayed and it’s still in the air if Lynn and friends will cop a plea.
It is like looking at a Mafia trial.
Despite David Smith’s background, I think his future view of the Church is very limited and often divisive.
I’ve argued that the issue sits in maintaining a power/control Church -which, in fact is two Churches in one now – the divide constantly growing (another thread?) That divide lies behind some of the perceptions and comments here as well.
“Are most Commonweal readers eager to see bishops and priests in prison?”
I can’t speak for anyone but myself. Speaking for myself, I’m eager for all perpetrators of sexual abuse to be justly punished. I don’t believe clergy should be exempt from the requirements of justice. If a prison sentence is what justice requires, then cleric perpetrators should be sentenced to prison.
Amen to that, and I will add, not only perpetrators, but also those who enable more abuse by the way in which they govern and administer.
Mr. Pauwels, thank you for your prayers; be assured you have mine as well.
My comment to Mr. Chichetto covers my disagreements with the rest of your post about the victim/survivor issue, with this note: as you point out, the effects of abuse vary from one person to another. The variation is not entirely predictable. That is why each survivor’s experience must be respected and considered. Professionals can generalize with care, but blanket judgments by non-experts are not useful and can be hurtful.
As for compensation and statutes of limitations, which you cover in two posts, I also disagree. PTSD is treatable but cannot be eradicated. Lost years cannot be restored. The real damage done to survivors does not have a statute of limitations. The fact that I was a victim and am a survivor does not erase what I suffered nor restore the income lost when I was in an acute stage, nor does it pay for ongoing therapy, which people with PTSD often need the way people with diabetes need ongoing insulin. Financial compensation doesn’t fix PTSD (life imprisonment doesn’t bring back the murdered, either), but it is just and helpful. It is also inaccessible to many survivors who may not be healed enough to go through a bruising legal process before the statute of limitations runs out; that was my case.
Statutes of limitations are designed not to ensure justice to anyone, but to protect institutions and insurance companies from financial liability. That is why the statute of limitations in my state is several years for private complaints but is much shorter in the case of schools. Justice and the justice system are not synonymous; in this case, they are not even close.
Here is an old Latin saying: omnis analogia claudicat – every analogy limps. The Arendt/Eichmann does not limp; it is immobile by trivializing the Holocaust. Start with a bad analogy and you get a lot of beside the point blah blah in posts.
“I don’t believe clergy should be exempt from the requirements of justice”
Jim P. ==
Do the perpertrators” include the bishops and other administrators who cover-up crimes and move the abusers around thus increasing their opportunities for crimes?
As usual Larry C’s comments are in the contemptuous, fatuous vein. Everyone here respects the Shoah. Which is still being denied by some people. The recognition of the Holocaust took many years and the efforts to keep its distinctiveness is laudable and necessary. The abuse of children has an older history and more difficult to appreciate because we do not have the pictures, eyewitnesses and the like. This thread is strongly educational towards that end. Not blah-blah at all. Except for the snarly.
“In my view, part and parcel of ‘just punishment’ is respecting statutes of limitations.”
This woudl be intresting to discuss over a few beers. I generally agree that statutes of limitations serve justice and that if you have a case you should get to court in a reasonable time. That said, there are particular issues in clergy sex abuse cases that affect what is reasonable and how people learn they have a case.
I have disagreed with Jim’s comments but he has good points and I could be persuaded upon reflection. I’d also like to hear more of Carolyn Disco’s comments onthis subejct.
I strongly diagree that parishioners are innocent. I am one of those parishioners who had no clue, and whether through neglect, spirtual blindless, an automatice acceptance of holiness of the clergy or some other reason, I and all other Catholics let our guards down and deeply failed each other and the Church. I have since apologized to my adult sons for my strong encouragement to them to be altar servers and my failure to recognize the dangers they were in.
Grant, the analogy may be challenging but that doesn’t make it improper. A portrait in minature is still a portrait, even if it doesn’t fill a wall in a museum. The impulse to bury one’s conscience in bureaucratic infrastructure is a fair description of what someone like Lynn might have done, as well as what a fair number of those tried at Nuremberg did, in fact do.
Those at Nuremberg, of course, never thought they were working on behalf of an institution that makes claims of universal moral authority. So even as they are clearly more culpable in the sheer scale of their deeds, perhaps they are less culpable in the hypocrisy with which they pursued them. I have been seeing comments to threads like this forever, and there always seems to be some justification for taking ones’ eyes away from the wrongdoing, whether it be improper holocaust analogies, journalists who aren’t “fair” enough, or maybe not “knowledgeable” about the nuances of Vatican politics, quibbling about whether the abused are survivors or victims, whether SNAP is motivated by good or self-interest, whether VOF has the right to call itself Catholic. And so on.
I just want to say amen to both Barbara and Bill M. (on prof. Cunnigham’s ptofound lack of insight on the depth of what survivors, or victims if you’ve got a semantic hangup, endure.)
Minimization of the problem only helps it endure in the canonical secrecy of the fortress!
“…you do not know…the details of what I have endured.”
catarinasdaughter,
I hear you and you deserve a better answer. I know there are depths of perversity so deep that most of us can’t imagine them, much less reach them. This is especially true when perversity is done by a priest (and I say that as a priest myself). Such perversity (as detailed in ROLLING STONES) is simply beyond me (and “beyond” the priests I know). If true (and I know it is true), I can’t fathom how a priest believes he can secure a place in the eyes of his parishioners after having done that to a child. It’s beyond the pale. Of course, psychologists will argue that he probably compartmentalized his “activity” to some upper depth or part of his brain as though entrusting it to some underground hand of sorts, never to be brought to light again. I am sure if perversion is perpetrated by a family member, it is just as bad. I am also sure that your wound remains deeper under your trauma because trauma like a dark current closes wounds off, making it difficult to objectify them. So please accept my apologies if I offended you.
The problem (again restated!) I have with the analogy (abuse/Holocaust) is that the Holocaust is enscribed in larger letters on our Western historical timeline (and rightfully so). It is also genocidal. The Holocaust doesn’t lower us COLLECTIVELY as humans as much as reveal to us our true level of inhumanity to others (to paraphrase something Simone Weil said about forgiveness). Abuse is not so “cosmic,” as it were. However, with that said, I certainly don’t want to hurt you nor feel you need to be handcuffed to my understanding of the Holocaust. I can NEVER achieve or experience an enlargement of what you have suffered at the hands of some family member and for that reason will defer from any further criticism of your analogy (out of respect).
Barbara,
I’m sure we’ve been reading the same threads. But you seem to imply you can either take stock of how horrors happened or absorb the horrors themselves. I think we need to do both. And I agree with Larry that playing the Shoah card conceals more than it reveals.
I just want to state categorically that I did NOT simply play the “Shoah Card.” I refered to a specific concept developed in a specific treatment of a specific figure in the perpetration of a crime in history. I did not at any point say “Holocaust” or “Nazi” or make the claim that the whole Holocaust is identical to the whole sex abuse scandal. Admittedly, my reference to Eichmann was under-determined, but perhaps those who were so concerned about the allusion might read the specific book and assess the ideas before trying to hang the “shoah card” around my neck. Hannah Arendt was trying to develop the “banality of evil” as a universal category that would help us to avoid the fetishization of the Holocaust that those who might be tempted to hold it up as the evil of all evils would be guilty of. I think it actually does a disservice to the victims and villians of history to set them aside and memorialize them as so beyond the pale as to make any empathy with either party impossible. If “never again” is going to be more than a sentimental slogan, we need to know what it is we’re saying never again to and be sensative to the potential repetitions of evil in all its forms in history.
Many of us here speak of the Holocaust as if the awareness of it has a long history. I can excuse the younger ones here. Going thru a Catholic seminary to 1965 I found little awareness of the Holocaust. In general the church and seminaries were fairly anti-semitic. Pope John XXIII’s saying to the Jews of Rome: “Sono Giuseppe, tuo fratello” “I am Joseph your brother”, was indeed a paradigm change. John Paul II was quite good in furthering this new approach. Through such great leadership the awareness of the Holocaust seeped through the Catholic consciousness. It took some time. Even in the 80′s one easily met Jewish advocates who were determined that the Holocaust be not forgotten.
So this awareness is fairly recent. It is now politically correct to acknowledge the Holocaust. So now the other extreme is happening. You start getting hit in the head as Eric is because you desire to show that this is humanity not just the Jews and the Germans. Remember most of the intellectuals in Europe were antisemitic prior to the Third World War. It is similar now with sexual abuse of children. For the longest time the victims were villified. People talk here about the international consciousness of the Holocaust and it is true. But that is the whole point. The Holocaust has many advocates. The abuse victims are fighting to get that recognition. Anyone who has read what I have written on these pages know that I am totally for Holocaust awareness. It is time now for the awareness to rise to where it belongs to the sexual abuse victims.
Thank you Catarinas Daughter for articulating this so well.
In one particular case in S.W. Ontario, Canada, a lady in her forties finally received a settlement from the Diocese, for the ongoing rape that she had experienced from her PP. It started when she was 12, and continued until she was 16, when she ran away from home. In the end, at 16 she was pregnant, had an illegal abortion, arranged by the PP, which went wrong, ended up in London University Hospital. Her life has been a litany of broken relationships, drug addiction, suicide attempts, etc. The Diocese finally settled her case the day before she was due in court, and it had gone to the wire because she refused to sign a secrecy agreement..
The most horrifying part of this to me was that then she started to receive telephone calls from local catholics, calling her a money grubbing whore amongst other things.
It strikes me that the past 25/30 years have probably been much worse for her than an holocaust survivor, because to this day she is still suffering, and it is debatable whether she can be called a survivor.
Bill M.
As an anecdote, when I was a kid growing up in the UK in the fifties, my PP told us that the Jews killed baby Jesus, we were taught to hate them. By the late sixties of course, Israelis were our heroes, even though the attitude of the church took much longer to change.
“Do the perpertrators” include the bishops and other administrators who cover-up crimes and move the abusers around thus increasing their opportunities for crimes?”
Ann – yes, certainly, assuming they knew full well what they were doing. Not being trained in the law, I’m a little foggy as to what specific laws they’ve broken and what punishments they’d face. But just speaking as a human being, they’ve perpetrated injustice, and the disorder they’ve caused needs to be made right, to the extent that’s possible.
I just want to express my appreciation to catarinasdaughter for her courage in sharing her experiences with us, and to Carolyn (again!) for her graceful and patient advocacy and explanations.
Jim Pauwels and James Chichetto, thank you for listening with respect even when we disagree and for real attention to what I said. That is a gift in the age of flaming. I would urge any clergy still on the thread to read Judith Lewis Herman’s Trauma and Recovery, because I think all clergy should know more about trauma and its’ still the best book in the field. (Consider the e-reader edition because the print editions have awfully small print and we’re none of us getting any younger.)
I agree more with Michael Cowtan, as one would expect.