Speaks volumes that this wouldn’t permanently disqualify a person from ministry. Looks like the pope has some experience in dealing with this. I wonder if he learned anything, or if this is still being dealt with quietly, with therapy. This is a crime, and apparently it is kept quiet.
How is it that even the secular world knows that these people can’t be reformed.
Because, back in the timeframe involved - some 30 years ago - that was the course of action that the "experts" were recommending. The Church tended to believe the experts and their belief - naively, as it turns out - that therapy could work sufficiently well that laicization of the offenders wasn't automatically necessary. Do we know this to be incorrect today? Certainly. But such was not the case back then. It is unfair to project current clinical opinion onto the honest - if incorrect - "professional opinions" of former days, in order to paint a picture of deliberate malfeasance on the part of either the Church or the psychiatric community.
(a)The NYT is anti-catholic. Rocket science, nor scientific literary analysis necessary. Ipso frickin'facto. res ipsa frickin' loquitur, etc. et frickin' cetera.
(b) The Holy Roman Catholic Church, the most visible multi-national, religious body in the Western World, is unfortunately infested with a large number of deviates, mostly of the homosexual, paedophilic variety. Ipso frickin' facto. res ipsa frickin'loquitur, etc. et frickin' cetera.
(c) The present Pope, is a splendid fellow. But, like every other pastor, bishop, archbishop, and cardinal in the outfit, he screwed up, probably more than once. For centuries now, the HRCC has been hushing this sort of thing up, shuffling the perverts around, putting them through penance, therapy, torture, imprisonment, sequestration in monasteries, death, etc. They have tried everything. Probably never did any good, except keeping it out of the papers, which in the olden days, no one could read anyway.
(d) Last hundred years or so, almost everybody can read. And, begininning in the 50s, due to a dearth of "vocations," the Holy Roman Catholic Church started admitting queers to the seminaries in ever greater numbers. Previously, a hint of lightness in the loafer was enough to send many a sweet boy packing. The new theory was, "What the Hell, they have to be celibate anyway, what's he difference if they are celibate queerly or heterosexually?"
Well, it's a bad theory, as pointed out by Tough Tony Bevilacqua, Archbishop of Philly. Unfortunately, The Holy Roman Catholic Church is paying for it now, bigtime. Guilty as charged, baby. Maybe that feel-good rabbi's next book should be, "When Bad Things Happen To A Good Church?"
In regard to Jewish perverts. Of course many a rabbi is a molester. But (a) there are fewer rabbis than priests and (b) last I checked, the Jews have no Pope, no Ruling Legal Authority. (c) No big time highly visible multi-national organization that's easy pickins for a nosy reporter. So, your Jews are less apt to make it to page 1 above the fold of the anti-catholic NYT than priests. If a rabbi-molester makes that paper at all, it's going to be in the classifieds, after "Livestock."
Did I mention that the NYT is anti-catholic? Always has been.
But this IS a Catholic problem. Now for the solution. This is a secular police matter. Call the cops. Arrest the pervert priests. Defrock'em immediately, Tie'm to stakes in front of the cathedrals and burn them. And the reporters of the NYT.
30 years ago and before that it was not so widely accepted as now..that therapy is of, at best, limited and most likely no help in “fixing” these men.
Not until fairly recently did we have a focus on this problem, TV shows about it, stricter laws mandating reporting for medical and mental health licensed professionals, and registering sex offenders.
I do not condone putting this person back with children, but lets just be fair. You can’t judge someone by what was ‘accepted” response 30 or more years ago. And it is also unfair to criticize ONLY the roman catholic church and leave out of these articles, or even raise the issue with other religious groups:Jews, Baptists, etc.
Moreover, priests fall within the “average” statistics of “men who are pedophiles.” Its just that it is more sensational when a Priest is guilty.
It is a very convenient, and wrong, way to avoid dealing with pedophilia by focusing on ‘priests” and ignoring the fact it is still a very common problem in general society.
That way, we can avoid the REAL problem in its entirety..lets just bash Catholics...why deal with a kid’s uncle, father, neighbors,teachers or mom’s boyfriend.?