Home     Writers     Op/Ed     Book Reviews     News     Bookstore     Photoshops     Submit     Search     Contact Us     Advertise  
  You are here: 

Wed

07

Apr

2010

Blaming Gays and the Devil, Playing Victim and Trivializing Decades of Molestation
Wednesday, 07 April 2010 05:12
by Mel Seesholtz Ph.D.

The latest round in the Vatican’s ongoing cover-up – from Pope Paul VI to John Paul II to Pope Benedict XVI – of predator priests is again front page news.  

1963 letter shows former pope knew of abuse

Associated Press - 4/1/2010  

A newly released letter suggests the Vatican was aware of clergy abuse in the U.S. nearly 50 years ago. 

In a 1963 letter to then-Pope Paul VI, the head of a Roman Catholic order that oversaw treatment of pedophile priests recommends removing them from active ministry. … 

Meanwhile, lawyers in a Florida abuse case say the Vatican office then headed by Pope Benedict failed to remove an alleged pedophile from the priesthood, even when the priest asked to be defrocked. … 

Pope Benedict’s latest feeble excuse was dissected by Maureen Dowd in her March 27, 2010 New York Times OpEd, “A Nope for Pope”: 

…The Catholic Church can never recover as long as its Holy Shepherd is seen as a black sheep in the ever-darkening sex abuse scandal. 

Now we learn the sickening news that Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, nicknamed “God’s Rottweiler” when he was the church’s enforcer on matters of faith and sin, ignored repeated warnings and looked away in the case of the Rev. Lawrence C. Murphy, a Wisconsin priest who molested as many as 200 deaf boys. 

The church has been tone deaf and dumb on the scandal for so long that it’s shocking, but not surprising, to learn from The Times’s Laurie Goodstein that a group of deaf former students spent 30 years trying to get church leaders to pay attention. … 

The pope is in too deep. He has proved himself anything but infallible. And now he claims he was uninformed on the matter of an infamous German pedophile priest. A spokesman for the Munich archdiocese said on Friday that Ratzinger, running the diocese three decades ago, would not have read the memo sent to him about Father Peter Hullermann’s getting cycled back into work with children because between 700 to 1,000 memos go to the archbishop each year. 

Let’s see. That’s two or three memos a day. And Ratzinger was renowned at the Vatican for poring through voluminous, recondite theological treaties. … 

“His Holiness” is anything but. Some have demanded Pope Benedict XVI resign, an act that would be unprecedented, but given the facts, is warranted. Ms. Dowd’s follow-up March 30, 2010 OpEd – “Should There Be an Inquisition for the Pope?” – further exposed the Vatican and its American apologists who do as the Vatican has dictated… blame the gays: 



 
 

Bill Donohue, the Catholic League president

Demonize gays, as Karl Rove did in 2004
 
In an ad in The Times on Tuesday, Bill Donohue, the Catholic League president, offered this illumination: “The Times continues to editorialize about the ‘pedophilia crisis,’ when all along it’s been a homosexual crisis. Eighty percent of the victims of priestly sexual abuse are male and most of them are post-pubescent. While homosexuality does not cause predatory behavior, and most gay priests are not molesters, most of the molesters have been gay.” 

Donohue is still talking about the problem as an indiscretion rather than a crime. If it mostly involves men and boys, that’s partly because priests for many years had unquestioned access to boys. 



 
 

Mr. Donohue’s ignorance is as offensive as the Vatican’s pathetic excuses. 

As Dr. Kathryn Conroy, (then) assistant dean of Columbia University’s School of Social Work, pointed out in her September 24, 2005 New York Times piece in response to the Vatican’s earlier ban on “gay priests” following the exposure of the Church’s decades long cover-up of sexual abuse by priests in the United States, “What is forgotten in all of the hysteria about priest sexual abuse is that pedophilia is about a sexual attraction to children (most often, regardless of their sex) and about access. … Reliable studies show that pedophiles (those adults who sexually abuse children) are overwhelmingly heterosexual. In fact, homosexuals are statistically underrepresented as those who sexually abuse children. …” 

But if blaming the gays doesn’t work, blame the Devil

    Father Gabriele Amorth, the chief exorcist for the Holy See, said in Rome that The [New York] Times’s coverage of Pope Benedict, which cast doubt on his rigor in dealing with pedophile priests, was “prompted by the Devil.” 

    “There is no doubt about it,” the 85-year-old priest said, according to the Catholic News Agency. “Because he is a marvelous pope and worthy successor to John Paul II, it is clear that the Devil wants to grab hold of him.” 

    The exorcist also said that the abuse scandal showed that Satan uses priests to try to destroy the church, “and so we should not be surprised if priests too ... fall into temptation. They also live in the world and can fall like men of the world.” 

Yes, the molesting priests did “fall like men of the world” and should have been punished by civil authorities like all other “men of the world.” But Father Amorth, like all other Vatican spokesmen, once again missed the point: the decades old cover-up by high-ranking Church officials. 

Then, in a truly perverted twist, another Vatican spokesman attempted to portray the victimizing Church as victim: 

Vatican Priest Likens Criticism Over Abuse to Anti-Semitism

By Daniel J. Wakin and Rachel Donadio

April 2, 2010 

ROME – A senior Vatican priest, speaking before Pope Benedict XVI at a Good Friday service, compared the world’s outrage at sexual abuse scandals in the Catholic Church to the persecution of the Jews, prompting angry responses from victims’ advocates and consternation from Jewish groups. … 

The pope and his bishops have denounced abuses in the church, but many prelates and Vatican officials have lashed back at news reports that Benedict failed to act strongly enough against pedophile priests, once as archbishop of Munich and Freising in 1980 and once as a leader of the Vatican’s powerful Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. 

To liken the Church’s self-inflicted problems to the fate of Jews in the Holocaust is not only bizarre but insulting, especially since the history of the Roman Catholic Church includes centuries of anti-Semitism, not to mention the record of Pope Pius XII. But the linking of Jews, child molestation, and gays has its own history. 

One of the most frequently heard stereotypes claims homosexuals are inveterate child molesters: crazed sexual perverts who prey upon and recruit children. But as University of Chicago historian George Chauncey pointed out in Why Marriage? The History Shaping Today’s Debate Over Gay Equality (Basic Books, 2004), the claim that homosexuals recruit children and the stereotype of them as child molesters are relatively new and grew out of  

the anxious years following the Second World War, when communists, criminal syndicates, and other half-invisible specters seemed to threaten the nation and when demonic new stereotypes of homosexuals were created and backed by government sanctions. … The old tropes of anti-Semitic rhetoric … were especially influential in shaping depictions of homosexuals. … And like Jews, they were depicted as a threat to children. In the most dangerous element of this new image, the escalation of antigay policing was accompanied, inspired, and justified by press and police campaigns that fomented stereotypes of homosexuals as child molesters. (18-19) 

And then, on Easter Sunday 2010, yet another Church spokesman did what the Vatican has been doing for decades. He tried to trivialize the international scandal by dubbing it “gossip”: 

Cardinal tells pope: Faithful not influenced by 'gossip'

By the CNN Wire Staff

April 4, 2010 

(CNN) -- In a rare move, a senior cardinal spoke before the pope's Easter Mass address at the Vatican on Sunday, saying the pontiff maintains the support of Catholics around the world “who do not let themselves be influenced by the gossip.” … 

his remarks clearly referred to those who have criticized Catholic leaders, including Pope Benedict XVI himself, for not having done much more during his years as a top official. … 

Sodano said the pope has the support of those who work in schools, hospitals and care centers, including 400,000 priests. 

“Also with you are the faithful who do not let themselves be influenced by gossip,” Sodano said in Italian, using the word “chiacchiericcio,” which means chatter or gossip. … 

“Gossip”? “Chatter”? Hardly. 

There were documented cases dating back to the 1960s, but it was not until early 2002 that the Boston Globe’scoverage of a series of criminal prosecutions of five Roman Catholic priests thrust the issue of sexual abuse of minors by Catholic priests into the national limelight. And the limelight spread quickly. 

The larger than usual headline of the Philadelphia Inquirer on Thursday, September 22, 2005 read “An ‘Immoral’ Cover-up.” A grand jury indicted the Philadelphia archdiocese in a 418-page report detailing rampant pedophilia and sexual abuse as well as decades of well planned cover-ups orchestrated by two Philadelphia cardinals, (the late) John Krol and (then recently retired) Anthony Bevilacqua. (Both Krol and Bevilacqua were outspoken critics of homosexuality and civil rights for gay and lesbian Americans.)  

Here are just a few of the documented examples of what predator priests did under the protection of Cardinals Krol and Bevilacqua: 

An 11-year-old girl who was repeatedly raped by a priest who took her for an abortion when she became pregnant. 

A fifth grader who was molested by a priest inside a confessional. 

A teenage girl who was groped by a priest while she lay immobilized in traction in a hospital room. 

A priest who offered money to boys in exchange for sadomasochistic acts of bondage and wrote a letter asking a boy to make him his “slave.” The priest remains in ministry. 

A sadistic priest who enjoyed having children play the roles of Jesus and other biblical characters in parish Passion plays. He made them disrobe and whip each other until they had cuts, bruises and welts. 

A priest who falsely told a 12-year-old boy his mother knew of the assaults and consented to the rape of her son. 

The grand jury found that many victims were abused for years and that many priests abused multiple victims, sometimes preying on members of the same family. Father Albert T. Kostelnick had 18 victims. Father James J. Brzyski, whose conduct the report described as a “criminal rampage,” abused 17 victims, many of them from a single parish. Father Nicholas V. Cudemo abused 16 victims and was allowed to stay in his pastoral role for decades after the first abuse report in 1966. 

And how did the Philadelphia archdiocese – and the Church as a whole – respond to the grand jury’s painstakingly documented report? In a grotesque display of self-interest and bunker mentality, they claimed to be victims. Even more disgusting is that, given the statute of limitations, no criminal charges could be filed against the priests or against “Princes of the Church” despite the evidence presented in the Philadelphia grand jury’s report. 

Not surprisingly, the Catholic Church has time and time and time and time again vehemently opposed legislation that would allow molesting priests – and their co-conspirators – to be prosecuted beyond the statute of limitations. Is that opposition based on morality or self-interest? Meanwhile, the Vatican and its minions have continued to pontificate on “moral issues” despite the fact that they seem not to have any idea what “moral” means. 

It’s long past time for the Vatican to stop blaming others for the insidious corruption that riddles the Church. The predator behavior cover-up continued not because of gays, and not because of the Devil. They continued because Church official – who live in luxury – were more concerned with protecting themselves and their institution than protecting children and teens from abuse by predator priests.


More from this author:
From Liberating Spirituality to Oppressive Dogma: The Politics of Religion (16474 Hits)
By Mel Seesholtz, Ph.D. Spirituality is intrapersonal. It’s a liberating and uplifting awareness. It nurtures personal growth. It inspires...
Herding the Sheeple, Voting on Justice (18888 Hits)
by Mel Seesholtz, Ph.D. “Let’s vote on it.” To most people that sounds like the ideal way to solve any issue. But it can also...
What’s in a Word: Wal-Mart and the New Jersey Supreme Court (12888 Hits)
By Mel Seesholtz, Ph.D. Hitler’s National Socialist German Workers Party used the Bible and their perversion of Christianity...
Rev. Ted Haggard: “A deceiver and a liar,” exposed (14696 Hits)
By Mel Sheesholtz Ph.D. Once again a self-appointed spokesman for “God” and the leader of a politically active (and lucrative) faith-based...
“Times they are a-changin’…” (8597 Hits)
By Mel Seesholtz, Ph.D. Pennsylvania Republican senator Rick Santorum – Golden Boy of the Christian Right, rabid homophobe, and Bush...
Related Articles:
Congress Needs to Stop Playing in Bush's Court (5161 Hits)
by Dave Lindorff There are two ways to look at the growing confrontation between Congress and the White House over access to information. ...
In a German "School State," Gays Remain Outside (5626 Hits)
(Renningen, Germany) - After a mother interfered on behalf of the dignity of marriage, a school project at a German school has gotten a bitter ...
Blaming All Americans for Bush's Debacle in Iraq? (3838 Hits)
by Walter C. Uhler Take a look at the September/October 2007 issue of Foreign Affairs and you'll find a fascinating article by James Dobbins:...
Ugandan Gays Can’t Leave With Empty Hands (2188 Hits)
by Viktor Zimmermann Recently, James Nsaba Buturo, the Ugandan Minister for Ethics and Integrity suggested that Gays will not be tolerated in...
Special Relationship: Bush Family Friends Flay Rape Victim (6732 Hits)
by Chris Floyd The ever-estimable Buzzflash asks the pertinent question: Will Laura Bush, renowned campaigner on behalf of the oppressed...


Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites
Trackback(0)
Comments (1)add comment

Publion said:

0
Good therapy doesn't make good law
There is no statute of limitations in therapy: a client who wants to deal with material from decades before in order to un-kink his/her life is welcome to do so. The clinical task of helping the client to get an accurate grasp of what was causing the problem back then and how to make things better now carries no 'sanctions' except that patient dishonesty is going to be a self-inflicted cost - in patient cash, time and life-quality/maturity.

The arena of law - civil and especially criminal - is far different: the 'sanction' is the deployment of the coercive police power of the state to deprive a defendant of property or even liberty. Consequently, in order to justify such an awesome and awful intrusion into the life of any citizen, the post-Medieval development of law evolved the requirement that the Sovereign power (monarch or republic) had to demonstrate clearly the guilt of a defendant in order to justify the deployment of its power against that defendant. This was a key element in the concept of 'limited government', which reached a remarkable height with the Founders' achievement of a government limited by a Constitution.

So 'removing the statute of limitations' - for the moment in these sex-abuse cases, but it could be extended to almost anything - must be seen not in the context of Law enshrining Therapy's best insights, but rather as a dangerous regression in Law and Government whereby 'evidence' (which never survives the passage of Time) upon which the government's deployment of its power must be justified
is rendered unnecessary. Which results in the government deploying its sovereign power without the need for any 'evidence', but merely on the word or emotion of 'pain' of an allegating-party. Which removes a vital firewall that prevents the government from deploying its powers without justification. And renders more possible - perhaps probable - that the governmeny might indeed simply claim to act on behalf of all past allegating-parties (or even future!) by deploying its power 'preventively' without any evidence at all.

This ominously dangerrous trajectory is enshrined in what I would call 'victimist law', which takes the clinical 'trust in the patient' Best Practice and seeks to apply it in Law, where it comes out of the sausage grinder as Believe the Victim and Pain is Evidence Too. I recall some feminist/victimist law prof recently saying about yet another 'progressive reform' that rolled back evidentiary protections that she was pleased that victims would no longer be denied justice just because there was no evidence. I submit that without valid and efficacious evidence that can ground the deployment of the sovereign power, than whatever results is not and cannot be 'justice', whatever else it may be.

I'd close with the following thought: Carol Gilligan's 'breakfast table' insight of 1982: that Mommy presiding over a table of squalling and not-yet-rational children must use intuition and 'care' to do whatever she thinks best to soothe the squallers. Which is a pretty sound description of what happens around domestic breakfast tables. But it cannot be easily translated into a system and philosophy of government, and most certainly not of Constitutional government.

Well-intentioned and clinically-informed persons might want to consider how the erosion of Constitutional government and practice in 'the past 10 years' was made possible by the hugely mistaken gambits of weakening Constitutional praxis and the Constitutional ethos from the Left, in the quest for sensitivity and responsiveness several decades before that.

A limited government - which is what this Constitutional government is - cannot do everything, even if a lot of that 'everything' is 'good' for people. Within the Gilligan Breakfast Table image, and in the various legal gambits of 'victimist law', are the seeds of a Sensitive Despotism which, whatever its merits or best-case scenarios might be, is hell-and-gone from the Constitutional vision that is the 'genius' of the American system and its culture.

The Framers eschewed Benevolent Despotism when it was all around them in their 18th century world. And the current Sensitive Despotism - whereby a caring and competent provider does whatever s/he thinks best for less mature 'children' - is the recipe for a return to Despotism, with the government as Mommy and the citizens as the squalling, immature Children. And Despotism - as the Framers realized - rarely remains Benevolent or Sensitive. As evidenced by this country's stunningly awful record in foreign affairs (including the rather Medieval concept of 'torture', by amazing coincidence).
 
April 15, 2010
Votes: +0

Write comment
smaller | bigger

busy
 

adsense

Top