US bishop says Church's credibility on abuse is 'shredded'

CathNews ^ | September 06, 2012

[Alex Murphy]

The US Catholic bishops' public face over sexual abuse matters has said the hierarchy's credibility on fixing the problem is "shredded" and that the situation is comparable to the Reformation, when "the episcopacy, the regular clergy, even the papacy were discredited," according to a Religious News Service report published on NCR.

Bishop Daniel Conlon of Illinois, last month told a conference of staffers who oversee child safety programs in American dioceses that he had always assumed that consistently implementing the bishops' policies on child protection, "coupled with some decent publicity, would turn public opinion around."

"I now know this was an illusion," Conlon, chairman of the bishops' Committee for the Protection of Children and Young People, said in an address on August 13 to the National Safe Environment and Victim Assistance Coordinators Leadership Conference in Nebraska.

His talk was published in the August 30 edition of Origins, an affiliate of Catholic News Service.

Conlon said the conviction of a high-ranking church official in Philadelphia for covering up clergy abuse and the upcoming trial of a bishop in Missouri on charges of failing to report a priest on suspicions of child abuse have contributed to a widespread impression that the bishops "have failed to keep their commitments."

The bishop disputed that view, but said even close friends "turned almost hostile" over dinner recently when he said the hierarchy has adopted "an entirely different spirit of openness and accountability."

[RobbyS]

Didn’t mean to offend , but there is a reason why some wag called the Public Schools the Established Church of the United States. My point being they are as organizationally integrated as the Catholic Church, despite appearances.

[denydenydeny]

The coverage, that which I have seen, also ignored the homosexual aspect, which seems central to me. Penn State, like all academia, is gay-friendly. I say also, the bishops are afraid of touching the issue except tangentially. In the past forty years, they gave up trying to keep homosexuals out of the priesthood. They drank the same juice as the colleges, that the practice is harmless.

Needed saying, and needs saying more.

[ansel12]

You went through all that merely to claim that the Pope’s Catholic priest, is the same as any teacher, in any school, in America?

A teacher, any where, of any kind, equals a Priest? That is laughable, I don’t think that Catholics who are school teachers would care for this route that you are taking, I doubt that Priests would either.

Aren’t the Orthodox similar to the Catholics? Why not use them for a justification?

[RobbyS]

The Priest is not the “pope’s priest” unless he is in the diocese of Rome.

No, I am saying simply that sexual offenders in the priesthood are rarer both in numbers and per capita than among the teacher’s in the public schools. Among the Protestant clergy, the numbers are about he same. But my point is that there is no effort to blame the public schools for their handling of sex cases. Your assumption that they are organizationally independent is true, but their method of handling sexual offenders was to let them leave town. More often than not, they ended up working for some other school district. Meanwhile the teacher’s personnel file had been purged, and usually all the information that a potential employer could get was that yes, he had worked for the school for x numbers of years. His contract had/had not been renewed. Seldom were the cops called in, because they didn’t want to be involved. Everyone wanted to avoid scandal. A lot of the time, sex was consensual. The girl was underage, the teacher older, but no rape was involved. Much has changed since the country got much excited by the priest scandal. A school district gets good publicity for keeping the kids “safe.’

[sitetest]

Dear RobbyS,

At least in Maryland, one doesn't need to be certified to teach in private schools.

At my sons’ high school, only about one-fifth of the faculty have any sort of education degree, and for many of them, it is a second degree added onto a real degree, such as in math, English or history.

sitetest

[ansel12]

Teachers are just regular people, there are millions and millions of people working as teachers, including every kind of regular Joe, from atheist to Muslim, to homosexual, to lesbian, to Scientologist, to Catholic, to Buddhist, to Druid, to Witch, to Satan worshiper, to the merely indifferent, it is a common, secular job.

Priests are the handpicked, spiritual leaders of ONLY the Catholic denomination, and number about 39,000, close to a million teachers probably call them “father”, and confess their sins to them to varying degrees and frequency.

Your efforts to justify something that should not be defended are just strange and unrelated to the topic.

[RobbyS]

The number of private schools is, unfortunately small, and unfortunately these are not free of the same “progressive” views. The top private schools need to get their students into the most prestigious schools.” and so they aim to make them attractive to such schools. If they don’t, their clients will stop paying. The best schools are not necessarily the best schools EXCEPT they bring students in contact with the right people. At Harvard, some of the brightest kinds in the country are brought together, but they get taught by TAs. J.K. Gailbraith, for one, made no secret of the fact that he didn’t like to teach undergraduates or even graduates. For the same reason, I suppose, that Babe Ruth would not have liked coaching a college baseball team, why great players seldom make good coaches. Other schools have good scholars who do like teaching. Those are hard to find. You won’t find them listed in US News.

[RobbyS]

I am not defending the deeds, but “hand=picked”? Catholic priests in this country have never been part of the social elite, the way that Episcopal priests once were. More often than not, they were kids from large, devout working class, middle-class families. Not terribly different from the kind of kid who went to the service academies. Not very different from the kids who went to a Southern Baptist seminary. By 1970, they were probably less well-educated than their parishioners. Which is one reason why Catholic families stopped sending their kids oft to seminary. Before, it was like a Jewish merchant sending off his kid to be a doctor. Now, not so much. Which is how the Church got into this fix, maybe. After Vatican II, lots of good kids dropped out of seminary. These started taking in the culls as well as the good kids. You have heard of the “Hollow”Military of the ‘;70s? We have been living with the hollow priesthood of Post Vatican II.

[ansel12]

LOL, you need a chat buddy, this talking about everything but the thread subject is bizarre, and boring.

[RobbyS]

The thread topic is the credibility of the Church owing to the misbehavior of priests and the mishandling of this by the bishops. But you seem not be interested in how the Church actually functions.

[ansel12]

That must be why you keep avoiding talking about the Bishop’s statement on the credibility of the Catholic denomination, and instead keep going on about all kinds of irrelevant stuff.

“The US Catholic bishops’ public face over sexual abuse matters has said the hierarchy’s credibility on fixing the problem is “shredded” and that the situation is comparable to the Reformation, when “the episcopacy, the regular clergy, even the papacy were discredited,”

[sitetest]

Dear RobbyS,

You're kinda wandering around in this post.

You originally said:

“No, the Catholic schools are also dominated by this. Anytime you hire a certified teacher, you get someone trained to be a public school teacher.”

What you're saying here (correct me if I'm wrong) is that the same problems that afflict public schools afflict Catholic schools because Catholic schools hire “certified teachers.” I pointed out that, at least in Maryland, private schools (Catholic and non-Catholic alike) don't have to hire folks certified to teach in public schools, and pointed to an example - my sons’ high school.

Now you're saying that the problem is not that the Catholic schools hire certified teachers but rather that there are not many private schools and thus are not free of progressive views. I think that's a bit of a non sequitur. There are, first of all, lots and lots of private schools. But it's true that enrollment at private schools is small compared to that of public schools.

But many private schools DON'T HIRE certified teachers, generally, in order to avoid many of the pitfalls found in public schools. THAT'S PART OF THE REASON WHY THEY'RE PRIVATE.

As to “progressive views,” I'd say that the faculty and staff of my sons’ school roughly looks like the rest of the United States. There are heart-on-the-sleeve liberals, and tough and determined conservatives. There are folks whose politics are rather muddied. One teacher is a rock-solid Republican, conservative Catholic, wouldn't vote Dem for dogcatcher. Ironically, his father, someone I've known for nearly 30 years, is a social-justice sort of Catholic, liberal as the day is long. But we're ALL Catholic, ALL Knights of Columbus, and ALL part of our school's family.

It's just not so cut-and-dried.

Among faculty members are socialist Quakers who still have BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome) bumper stickers on their cars to folks who strongly supported Ron Paul, and have only grudgingly come around to the “liberal” Romney.

At least around here, this isn't terribly unusual in private schools.

Next, you jump to a discussion of “top private schools,” and talk about making them attractive. I'm not sure what that has to do with being liberal or progressive. Many parents send their kids to private schools on the assumption that these schools will be DIFFERENT from the public schools. One possible difference for which folks might be looking might be in the area of political correctness, which is strongly tied to progressivism and political liberalism.

In my region, there are certainly very good private schools that are seen as very progressive. There are also very good private schools that are not seen as politically progressive or liberal.

But I live in a region that's pretty darned liberal - the Archdiocese of Washington. In a way, it's surprising that there are ANY schools in this area that aren't very liberal in their focus. Not because of the progressive virus run amok in the teaching profession but because MOST FOLKS IN THIS REGION ARE LIBERAL, whether they're teachers or not.

I imagine that if I visited private schools in southwest Virginia, I'd find even fewer liberals teaching in these schools.

Then you jump to a discussion of Harvard, one with untrue and/or outdated stereotypes. Not sure what that has to do with my original point, which is that many private schools in my area just don't hire certified teachers, or even folks with education degrees.

sitetest

[redgolum]

Again, I think you are at least partially right.

But part of it is that no matter what, there are Catholics on this board who will immediately look to deflect the blame and criticism by pointing out either abuse in public schools, or by claiming Protestant's have a higher level of sexual assault by pastors.

It is a common reaction to a failing in something you love, but in the end it is harmful to everyone.

For the school teachers, the abuse may not have the same percentage of abusers as the Catholic church in the bad old days, but the over numbers are much greater (there are many times more public, and even private, school teachers than priests). School districts play toss the potato with known problem teachers, in order to hide it. IF the scandal gets the attention it deserves, it will be more expensive than anything seen so far. But because it is a government body, the level of disclosure is much less, and the corruption is widely spread.

Case in point. A local school in western Illinois fired and charged a teacher for having sexual contact with a cheer leader. She was looking for better grades, and he told her how to get them (won't get cruder beyond that).

It was reported in the local news, but didn't spread much beyond that. Why? It is so COMMON it isn't worth commenting on. The girl in the situation later started sleeping with the prosecuting attorney in the case. The attorney got disbarred (for taking her and another under aged girl on a booze/bar hopping trip to Springfield), but no charges where filed. Why? This is Illinois, and they would have to lock up most of the state and local officials.

[redgolum]

Notice how fast Penn State dropped out of the news.

The former president of Penn State used to be at the University of Nebraska. He left during a little episode popularly called “The Franklin Scandal”.

I suspect that Sandusky was providing boys for more than himself.

[sitetest]

Dear redgolum,

“But part of it is that no matter what, there are Catholics on this board who will immediately look to deflect the blame and criticism by pointing out either abuse in public schools, or by claiming Protestant's have a higher level of sexual assault by pastors.

“It is a common reaction to a failing in something you love, but in the end it is harmful to everyone.”

No, I don't think that's mainly the thing to which we're reacting.

There are people, filthy anti-Catholic bigots of the worst demonic sort who actually have the audacity to label themselves "Christians" (their father IS the Father of Lies, after all). They have often, especially in the past, tried to tie the priest abuse scandal to our theology and discipline. They will blame it on celibacy, and then they will tie it deeper to our “flawed,” “unbiblical” theology.

So, we point out that not only do these problems exist in other systems and organizations NOT RUN BY THE CATHOLIC CHURCH OR ACCORDING TO CATHOLIC TEACHING OR DISCIPLINE (and yes, I'm yelling that part), but that in some cases, the other organizations and systems actually have worse abuse problems, and at least at this point, nearly-infinitely worse problems of cover-ups.

That's why you will often see Catholics post a reply to a teacher-abuse or Protestant-abuse thread along the lines of, “If only they could marry.”

Do we have a problem? Yup. Was the problem even worse than it is now? Oh, yeah. Have we been working on it? You better believe it. Is it all fixed? No, and as long as we're all subject to the effects of the Fall, it won't be.

But we're not very interested in the lame-brain, idiotic, satanic musings of dark-hearted, spiritually-lost anti-Catholic bigots about the errors of our theology and discipline and that it is these errors that cause the priests to abuse children.

And our reaction is to remind others that these sorts of problems happen elsewhere, all without the benefit of Catholic belief or teaching or discipline or celibacy or anything!

sitetest

[TSgt]

Quoting out of context?

How could anything he said be in decent context?

I never cease to be amazed at the lengths some FReepers will go to defend pedo-clergy!

[RobbyS]

What exactly is American education? What is there that pulls it all together, its underlying principles, those which are followed with few exceptions by American schools at every level. No. One is that education is a state function. That every school, whether it be privately owned or operated by a church or owned and operated by a government entity is at bottom an agent of the state. Another is that it must be a democratic education. Democratic in the sense that John Dewey used the term more than a hundred years ago, which is to fit each person where he.she belongs in that society. That society is conceived as totally secular. Secular is some ways like France is secular. But I think we must remember that Dewey, like Marx, starts with Hegel, but then goes his own way, rejecting idealism for something like Pierce’s “Pragamaticism” but which he finally calls instrumentalism. The purpose of the school is to serve as an instrument of the state.

Now sixty years ago, it was a common topic among Catholic educators to worry about the influence of Dewey in public education. The protestant influence in the schools had ebbed away and been replaced by a thinking that was not Marxist but admiring of its sociology. That is one reason why Catholics as well as Protestants were alarmed when the Supreme Court outlawed prayer in the public schools. An accommodation had been reached, where the school district was overwhelming Protestant, say as in Alabama, then the “tone” would be Protestant. In Massachusetts, another school district might as well have been a parochial school. Where there was a mixture, then the tone was something like liberal protestant/liberal Jewish. Since the decision secularism, owing so much to Dewey’s philosophy, and already found in many districts, has became dominant in the great majority of districts.

This was much furthered by the federal education act of 1965 which was a kind of final solution to the question of government aid for Catholic schools that had been a factor since the Catholic insurge around 1850. It was also furthered by the rage of ecumenicalism after Vatican II. I submit that from that point on, what had distinguished Catholic education from others went away very quickly. Just about as quickly as the teaching nuns. Land O’ the Lakes was a sure sign of this development. Bill Buckley described what had happened at Yale in the book that brought him to prominence. Catholic educators who ling had lamented that OTHERs thought of Catholic colleges as no better than upgraded parochial schools, now decided to go down that same path. What should,in their opinion, to distinguish them from other universities? Well, as little as possible. Likewise the Catholic schools that were not shut down by the dioceses after they lost their cheap labor. They would become like the private schools, or “better”public schools. Well, pretty much all this has happened. There is not a nickle;’s worth of difference between Georgetown and Harvard. Ditto the Jesuit Higb school in my area and the toney high school in High Park.

[sitetest]

Dear RobbyS,

So - Are you now abandoning the initial assertion that Catholic schools are dominated by progressivism because they hire certified teachers who are trained to be public school teachers?

And are you now abandoning the assertion that Catholic schools are dominated by progressivism because they want to be like public schools?

sitetest

[markomalley]

The church will become small and will have to start afresh more or less from the beginning.

She will no longer be able to inhabit many of the edifices she built in prosperity. As the number of her adherents diminishes . . . she will lose many of her social privileges. . . As a small society, [the Church] will make much bigger demands on the initiative of her individual members....

It will be hard-going for the Church, for the process of crystallization and clarification will cost her much valuable energy. It will make her poor and cause her to become the Church of the meek . . . The process will be long and wearisome as was the road from the false progressivism on the eve of the French Revolution — when a bishop might be thought smart if he made fun of dogmas and even insinuated that the existence of God was by no means certain . . . But when the trial of this sifting is past, a great power will flow from a more spiritualized and simplified Church. Men in a totally planned world will find themselves unspeakably lonely. If they have completely lost sight of God, they will feel the whole horror of their poverty. Then they will discover the little flock of believers as something wholly new. They will discover it as a hope that is meant for them, an answer for which they have always been searching in secret.

And so it seems certain to me that the Church is facing very hard times. The real crisis has scarcely begun. We will have to count on terrific upheavals. But I am equally certain about what will remain at the end: not the Church of the political cult, which is dead already, but the Church of faith. She may well no longer be the dominant social power to the extent that she was until recently; but she will enjoy a fresh blossoming and be seen as man's home, where he will find life and hope beyond death.

Joseph Ratzinger, Faith and the Future (1969)

---

Just something to think about...in light of Bishop Conlon's comments.

[heyheyhey]

See chart from John Jay report (pdf). By the time the "Catholic scandals" erupted in media the actual abuses were almost nonexistent. I asked a priest friend (smart man) what he thought about the "scandals" when they first erupted, and he said that in his opinion media were paving the road to war in Iraq, and Catholic Church could be the only obstacle to it. At that time Blessed John Paul II and good number of US Bishops strongly opposed the invasion of Iraq as lacking justification, in their opinion.

The "scandals" were huge success for the media. Boston Globe got a Pulitzer for it in 2002. And the war started while Bishops got themselves busy righting wrongs that were decades old.

And now the ball just keeps rolling with Bishops bending over and backwards under the continued pressure, and frantically trying to find a once-for-all remedy, with "cures" that are worse than the disease.

Their attempts to invent a system that would allow canonize Saints while they are still alive, are more than likely to be futile, given the simple fact from Catholic theology that each and every human being is prone to sin.

The only working solution, that I can see, is ignoring the pressure and using common sense (the Boy Scouts might offer a hint), and treating each criminal case individually instead of blaming the whole Church and the Pope for each perpetrator.