"In many dioceses, the civil authorities preferred that the Church handle these matters internally."
Huh? Law Enforcement didn't want the Church to report the crimes of priests committing the crimes of sexual molestation of minors? Where is this cited?
Dear marajade,
"Law Enforcement didn't want the Church to report the crimes of priests committing the crimes of sexual molestation of minors?"
No, in many places, at many times, no they did not. Nor did folks in law enforcement necessarily want to get involved in exposing the crimes of judges, legislators, or other powerful interests. Today, it's popular to beat up on the Catholic Church, and there are those who will take every opportunity provided, whether legitimate or not.
But 30 and 40 years ago, often the Catholic Church benefited from the great silence and looking away that have benefited other powerful institutions and people. Folks in the know didn't only look away from the sins of the Kennedys or FDR.
"Where is this cited?"
Much of it has been cited here on FreeRepublic, from other sources. If you were to go back through some of the threads here on the Religion Forum from 2002 and earlier, you might be able to dig up some of that stuff.
In any event, I used to work in the mental health field, thus I remember first hand when the "rules," both written and unwritten, were changing. I remember when laws were changed to require health care workers to report suspected child abuse. This was controversial to many. Up until that time (early 1980s), it was believed that the best way to handle these incidents was privately and informally. It was thought to be better for the victim, the families, and the offenders.
This conventional wisdom turned out to be wrong all the way around, but nonetheless, that's what folks believed going back 30 years or more.
sitetest