There's a myth that modern is a prescriptive, and in many cases, priestly predators would often appeal to "advanced" techniques in psychology to obtain consent from their victims for their own personal gratification. Many Bishops, irresponsibly, failed to trust tried and true methods, spiritual methods, and began to appeal to modern, and therefore ineffective, solutions. It should surprise no one that Psychology might have a better reputation than Christian Ministry in certain circles, but what is most surprising of all is that this undue enthusiasm for a predominantly secular (and largely unsuccessful) approach and its practitioners isn't checked by the facts. On top of being largely ineffective, at least when it comes to child predators, psychologists are far more likely to abuse, sexually or otherwise, those entrusted to their care than are priests.
Did unwarranted optimism for newfangled, and ineffective as it turned out, clinical psychology play a role in the idea that these predators could be re-educated and released back into their old jobs? But wait, there's an added twist. Coupled with this enthusiasm for newfangled, and dare we say, liberal, ideas, there was a coupled a contempt for the ancient ideas of our fathers:
“The Church authorities failed to implement most of their own canon law rules on dealing with child sex abuse...canon law appears to have fallen into disuse and disrespect during the mid 20th century. In particular, there was little or no experience of operating the penal (that is, the criminal) provision of that law... for many years offenders were neither prosecuted nor made accountable within the Church.”
But it wasn't just enthusiasm for the newfangled and contempt for the old, but the fact that during the aggiornamento, all scepticism and vigilance against the excesses and often erroneous conteptions of modernity were dropped in favor of uncritical enthusiasm, and perhaps, a diabolical and malicious intent.
As the London Times goes on to say:
Therefore, they stopped using it. No longer did priests accused of child abuse face a canonical trial and the possibility of "defrocking".
Instead, and with disastrous consequences, they were sent for therapy and then, "cured", they were reassigned to ministry.
The bottom line is that if canon law had been used properly, fewer children would have been abused. Civil authorities would still not have been informed, but priests found guilty of child abuse under Church law would have been punished and likely removed from ministry making it more difficult for them to offend again.
It's obvious to anyone whose been watching this modern drama play out that the Catholic Church's administrators weren't guilty of being medieval, secretive and closed off to the spirit of the world, they were guilty of inviting it in and allowing it to set up shop.
Therapy led to soaring abuse rate in Irish Church -Times Online
No comments:
Post a Comment