Posted on 07/31/2018 6:21:11 PM PDT by ebb tide
The root of the Catholic Church’s sex abuse crisis is “sin and a retreat from holiness, specifically the holiness of an integral, truly human sexuality,” Bishop Edward Scharfenberger wrote to the priests and seminarians of his diocese.
In a letter released by the Roman Catholic Diocese of Albany on Sunday, Scharfenberger blasted Cardinal Theodore McCarrick without mentioning his name, noting that the abuser prelate engaged in “incestuous” predation toward those in his spiritual care.
“No doubt you have been and will be hearing from your people about how shaken and discouraged they are over public revelations of despicable behavior on the part of a very popular and charismatic Cardinal with priests and seminarians in his care,” Bishop Scharfenberger wrote. “One holy and faithful Catholic gentleman – a medical professional and a dear friend – texted me just this morning about his family’s utter despondency over this and that the USCCB should disband itself: “[t]heir credibility is shot, probably for decades.”
Bishop Scharfenberger pledged to those who have “suffered such traumatic experiences at the hands of their spiritual fathers,” and expressed his hope that they would “find the courage” to come forward.
The sex abuse fiasco is “much more than a crisis of policies and procedures,” the bishop advised. “It is a profoundly spiritual crisis.”
Priests and cardinals are obligated to follow Church teaching that sexual activity outside of “a real marriage covenant” is a “grave sin,” he wrote:
In negative terms, and as clearly and directly as I can repeat our Church teaching, it is a grave sin to be “sexually active” outside of a real marriage covenant. A cardinal is not excused from what a layperson or another member of the clergy is not. A member of the clergy who pledges to live a celibate life must remain as chaste in his relationship with all whom he serves as spouses within a marriage. This is what our faith teaches and what we are held to in practice. There is no “third way.”
“Sexual activity” includes grooming and seduction – the kind of experience that one of our brothers tells of in a recent interview in America magazine that you may have seen. The psychological and spiritual destructiveness of such predatory behavior, really incestuous by a man who is held up as a spiritual father to a son in his care – even if not a minor – cannot be minimized or rationalized in any way. On that, it seems to me, we are experiencing an unusual unity amidst the many political and ecclesial tensions in our communities.
Abuse of authority – in this case, with strong sexual overtones – with vulnerable persons is hardly less reprehensible than the sexual abuse of minors, which the USCCB attempted to address in 2002. Unfortunately, at that time – something I never understood – the Charter did not go far enough so as to hold cardinals, archbishops and bishops equally, if not more, accountable than priests and deacons.
McCarrick, who resigned from the College of Cardinals this weekend and allegedly abused boys as young as 11 as well as his own seminarians, was one of the bishops who played a key role in drafting and promoting the anti-child abuse charter Scharfenberger mentioned. In the wake of revelations about McCarrick, many Catholics have pointed out that they complained for years the charter didn’t provide accountability for predator bishops. Others have also noted the incongruity of so many Catholic bishops clamoring for an official “policy” against evil as a solution to the crisis.
“My office doesn’t have a policy against plunging hammers into the necks of my colleagues. But my co-workers would not excuse themselves from the duty to stop me from doing this by citing the absence of such a policy in a rulebook, or by explaining that their job description did not explicitly include language about hammer-wielding colleagues,” Michael Brandon Dougherty wrote.
Scharfenberger seemed to acknowledge both of those points in his letter, writing, “More words are not going to repair, let alone restore, the damage that has been done. Lawyering, pledges and changes in the bureaucratic structures and policy – however well intentioned – cannot do it either...Abuse of authority – in this case, with strong sexual overtones – with vulnerable persons is hardly less reprehensible than the sexual abuse of minors, which the USCCB attempted to address in 2002. Unfortunately, at that time – something I never understood – the Charter did not go far enough so as to hold cardinals, archbishops and bishops equally, if not more, accountable than priests and deacons.”
The bishop believes “the vast majority of clergy...live or, at least, are striving to live holy and admirable lifestyles. I am ashamed of those of my brothers, such as the Cardinal [McCarrick], who do not and have not.”
“All of us who are ordained to preach what the Church teaches must practice what we preach and teach,” he wrote. “We also need to uphold what our faith proclaims about the gift and beauty of human sexuality, fully lived in its essential conjugal meaning. A culture of virtue and chastity – in short, personal holiness – rooted in a trusting and committed relationship with Jesus Christ is the path toward healing and wholeness, even as we seek to drive the evil behaviors among us from the womb of the Church.”
It’s not an ‘either/or’.
Correct policies AND holiness are necessary for any organization with such responsibilities.
Just a cranky .02
“It’s not an ‘either/or’.
Correct policies AND holiness are necessary for any organization with such responsibilities.”
Yes, but if we had holiness, there would be no need for the policies.
Galatians 3:19.
I would say that’s exactly why they have policies....
I would say that’s exactly why they have policies....
Original sin exists. That is why you must have law. This is trying to paper over the sins
I agree... and it was what I was saying on another thread. Some policies can be set forth and based in holiness, but if the anchor in God isn’t firm then the enemy will shoot the whole thing full of flaming arrows and they will be very difficult if not impossible to put out.
Sin is a powerful thing, and only the grace of God is greater. And to obtain grace and mercy we must constantly go to the mercy seat.
This is a pan-Christian concern: Orthodox, Roman Catholic, Protestant (all Christian worship communities where worshipers are serious about yielding their lives to Jesus).
We need to remember too that holiness isn’t about US. It’s about HIM. The best of our manifestos, whatever they might be, are fatuous before HIM.
True. But how many people have ever had that? Darn few.
Law teaches us about the need for grace — and still the need exists unmitigated. I haven’t seen a church community anywhere in Christendom yet that didn’t have some kind of policies. But when the policies are the be-all and end-all, people find all manner of creative ways around them.
And that’s why we have the law. That’s my point. One - holiness, that is - is more important than the other and would make the other unnecessary.
I think we’re saying the same thing. Just pointing out that neither the law alone is sufficient nor are anywhere nearly enough people imbued with anything approaching sufficient holiness to not need both sound doctrine and sound faith.
The Jesuits need to correct their order or be eliminated. The choice will be theirs, until it isn’t.
The real problem goes back to the VII establishment of bishops’ conferences (which had not existed before then). The Church has always, of necessity, been slightly on the bureaucratic side, but once these “conferences” were created, the bishops stopped taking individual responsibility and acted instead as if by meeting and deciding on a policy in response to a problem, they had really done something about it.
Of course they hadn’t done anything, particularly since the head honchos or at any rate most powerful bishops on these conferences were the ever-ambitious and climbing members of the gay mafia themselves. Don’t forget McCarrick’s development of “policy” in this area.
There were a couple of bishops in the US who refused to go along with the “policies” and actually managed their own dioceses, kept their seminaries clean, etc. But the great majority just used the policies either to cover up their own corruption or to intimidate decent but weaker bishops.
All of this was enabled by the downplaying the seriousness of personal sin and the emphasis on social sin that occurred after Vatican II. Related to this was the attack on both traditional worship and traditional beliefs. I do not want to hear another word of what Vatican II said. It is time to get back to obeying the Commandments and the right worship of God. The true Catholic faith is what we have received, not what some committee makes up.
There should be a rule in the church: Stop trying to explain the whole thing. Summarily dismiss any priest who does it. Turn them over with any evidence to the local authorities.
THAT might start to get people listening to your excuses.
As John Adams said, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
Same thing goes for the Church.
Catholic Caucus.
Thank-you and God Bless.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.