Fr. Federico Lombardi, director of the Holy See’s Press Office, released a statement on Saturday morning in which he made three “observations” regarding sexual abuse by people and in institutions of the Catholic Church. He also addressed dismissed as unfounded attempts to link the Pope to a decision to transfer a priest found to have committed sexual abuse when Benedict XVI was Archbishop of Munich.
The first of the three “observations” made by Fr. Lombardi was to point out that the “line taken” by the German Bishops’ Conference has been confirmed as the correct path to confront the problem in its different aspects.
Fr. Lombardi included some elements of the statement made by Archbishop Robert Zollitsch at a Friday press conference following his audience with the Pope. The Vatican spokesman highlighted the approach established by the German bishops to respond to the possible abuses: “recognizing the truth and helping the victims, reinforcing the preventions and collaborating constructively with the authorities – including those of the state judiciaries – for the common good of society.”
Who knows what the ins and outs of all this are. There is a slanging match going on between reports in the Times and the Telegraph [Gledhill/Thompson].
However, what is clear is that in yet another instance, this time in Germany, the church has tried to deal with things ‘in-house’. It should have done what any responsible organisation would have done, which is to report the matter to the police right at the start, rather than attempting amateurish rehabilitation attempts.
As far as I can see this problem will continue as long as the RC church fails to undertake the process that other churches have put in place of: putting in place transparent and scrupulously observed child protection policies; getting rid of its obsessive secrecy; stopping trying to deal with matters internally by secret ‘courts’ which supposedly bind witnesses, claimants and participants under threat of excommunication; and providing proper procedures for receiving and dealing with complaints. I really hope they do what they claim this time.
It is one reason why, notwithstanding an increasing respect for it, Rome is the last church I would ever consider joining, not that I am looking.
No church is immune from these problems, we can however determine to act in accordance with best practice in preventing the opportunity for them to occur, and deal openly and properly with them when they arise.
#1 – Not sure where you live, but in the United States, priests are no more likely to offend than ministers of other religions, nor teachers, nor, in fact, of any other men with access to children. Of course, there are more priests involved, but then, there are a lot of Catholic priests – 40,000 last I knew. That’s more than the membership of several TEC dioceses put together. On a percentage basis, Catholic priests are pretty much in the pack – about 3-4%.
Moreover, the RC bishops handled these cases according to norms common 40 years ago or so, when they were coming up. It was then thought that kids were better off if the matters weren’t public. Public opinion on that is changed now, and it may be right. Or not.
American public schools, we are learning, are the sites of much child sexual abuse, and abusing teachers are commonly released to other districts without even the “amateurish rehabilitation attempts” or records following.
Hence, it’s simply slander to point the finger at the Catholic Church for what is a large social problem common across social institutions. I’ve no doubt that if you looked, you would find it in your own religion.
the RC bishops handled these cases according to norms common 40 years ago or so
#2. Are you claiming that 40 years ago, most people would have felt that taking a child abuser out of one parish and putting him in another was appropriate?
Don’t you just love plausible deniability?
Sidney, do you have a study on what “most people would have felt” 40 years ago?
Thanks #1
“I’ve no doubt that if you looked, you would find it in your own religion”
I am in the Church of England, although I am not sure that is a religion. I would probably call myself a Christian if I thought a bit about it.
We have had some problems, although on nothing like the same scale. What we have done is to put in place thorough and exhaustive checks and procedures involving anyone involved with children or vulnerable people, and any events where they are involved. Further old files have been reviewed to see whether there are any problems in the woodwork. It has been a salutory experience but worthwhile, and hopefully we are a safer place for children than many. It is as basic as making sure that children are supervised by never less than one adult, for firstly the protection of the child, and secondly the safety from false accusations of the adult.
“Hence, it’s simply slander to point the finger at the Catholic Church for what is a large social problem common across social institutions”
It is a common problem, but as far as I can see it is not one that the Catholic Church has faced up to. I sincerely hope it does now, and will take a hard look at the institutional behaviour which has made a common problem, a particular feature of the church. Were it to put in place the appropriate safeguards, it would be not only protecting its children and priests, but also itself if it can show that in any particular case it has operated best practice and followed that scrupulously. Where it can be shown to have had child protection procedures at the heart of its operations, it might even provide some defence to actions where, as will happen, that notwithstanding, abuse takes place.
I would have thought this would be an absolute priority, but wibbling on about protecting the institution, the needs of the priests concerned, or defensively complaining that the Catholic Church is subject to unfair singling out will not cut the mustard. There is a problem, it is common to all institutions where children are involved and can be targetted by offenders. Deal with that and get on with sorting it out is the only way, as we have tried to do.
I am not defending the Catholic Church, defensively or otherwise. I am stating that the problems are common social problems, not specific to any one organization (citing again the situation of American public schools, which I mentioned on another thread). In fact, I think the American Catholic bishops have failed terribly to address the problem here, which has nothing to do with the factors you cite. In fact, they put in place the very sort of safeguard you suggest, which will help.
I suggest that anyone really interested in the subject read Pedophiles and Priests, by Phillip Jenkins. Studies he cites suggest, Pageantmaster, that you do have exactly the same though hidden by the patina of social acceptance (the New York Times likes liberal protestants). Even so, American Anglicanism (TEC) has seen two of her sitting bishops revealed as doing precisely what Catholic bishops did. I personally know a former Episcopal priest convicted of molesting an 8 year old boy. He recently resurfaced in some sort of retreat ministry. How many more are there?
First let me say that I have a lot of respect for +Benedict XVI. I think he is probably the best thing to happen to the Roman Church in rather more than a half century at the least. Having said that; I feel a point needs to be made in response to those attempting to shield the Pope from responsibility for what went on during his tenure as a German diocesan bishop.
When I was in the Navy I was told that one can delegate authority but never responsibility. That is to say that you are responsible for what occurs under your command. The bishop of a diocese is like the captain of a ship. It does not matter if you are on the bridge when something bad happens. You can be asleep in your bunk or you can be in the engine room when the Officer of the Deck screws up. It doesn’t matter. You are the captain and you are responsible for the ship and everyone on board her.
If someone was handling this matter in a manner inconsistent with then Cardinal Ratzinger’s directives, that may be a mitigating factor. Likewise if relevant information was withheld from him by subordinates. But none of this can completely absolve him of responsibility for what went on during his tenure as the local ordinary.
He was the captain of the ship.
Having made this point I would also hasten to add that no one is perfect. Mistakes will be made. In the broader context I think that while he is not blameless in the matter, his culpability ranks relatively low when compared with many other of his contemporaries.
FWIW I think that the late +John Paul II who was serving as the “Admiral of the Fleet” (to continue the maritime analogy), may well be judged much more harshly once the cult of personality wears off a bit. He allowed this sort of disgusting activity to run rampant in the Roman Church throughout much of his tenure and failed to discipline bishops who were engaged in cover ups that should have landed some of them in jail.
In the end the sloppy handling of what, at least in his diocese, appears to have been an isolated incident should not IMO overshadow the immensely important steps taken since Ratzinger’s promotion to clean up the many problems that have plagued the Western Church for decades.
In ICXC
John
As I recall, when the abuse problems surfaced in the United States, the Vatican referred to it as a primarily American problem, even though there were reports of the same issue in many other countries. That they wouldn’t even consider that it was widespread was inexcusable and, frankly, stupid. What, they think it’s better to put out the wildfires individually in other countries and distinguish between the “American” problem, then the “Irish” problem, and now the “German” problem? I guess that’s better than having to admit years ago that it’s a systemic problem.
And I’m weary of the tired rhetoric about such a tiny number of priests involved. That may be true BUT it’s NOT a tiny number of victims. A notorious case here in Texas involved one priest molesting several DOZEN victims over the years because of the church policies. He was far from alone in producing those sorts of numbers. That’s what distinguishes the RC cases — the large numbers of victims abused by that “tiny” number of priests. It’s simply unparalleled in other denominations.
#5 Nope. But I would like to understand why Agast would write the comment that I quoted. It doesn’t seem persuasive to me.
#10 – Again, I refer you to Pedophiles and Priests, by Phillip Jenkins. Most of what I write comes from him, my professional experience with sex offenders, and reading on the Catholic situation since 2002. Jenkins is a professor of at Penn State. He notes that in the 50s and 60s, roughly, professional thought was that handling sex abuse cases quietly was better for the children. To this day, families (where most sex abuse occurs) tend to hide and deny the problem. Moreover, professional psychologists told us all, including the bishops, that therapy would take care of the problem. We don’t believe that today, but they did then. That’s the way things were, right or wrong.
That’s what distinguishes the RC cases—the large numbers of victims abused by that “tiny†number of priests.
Actually, it doesn’t. One study of incarcerated sex offenders showed an average of several hundred victims each (I’m thinking 500, but it was probably around 200; I’ve known several sex offenders with 100-200 admitted victims). As a matter of fact, most of the accused priests had one allegation. The real predators (like Rudy Kos) are truly rare, in the general sex offender population and among among accused Catholic priests. The facts simply don’t support differentiating offending priests from other offenders. In any case, the point of noting percentages of priests involved is that it’s about the same as any group of men with access to children.
Which is my entire point: this is a social problem, not a Catholic problem specifically. I am “aghast” (the system dropped the “h”) at scapegoating one particular group for a problem common to our social mileau. The first step in solving a problem is to correctly define it. Pushing one’s particular religious agenda does not contribute to a correct definition.