Editor: The Bishops need to start taking responsibility for what they've failed to do in their training of priests and opening the doors of the Church to modern psychological techniques, moral relativism, Marxism and ultimately, Modernism. It's a convenient time to point out what happened in California with the IHM Sisters at the hands of practitioners like Doctor Coulson who destroyed the lives of the Nuns there by appealing to their desire for becoming more modern. They became more modern,
alright.,
here and abstract
here. Rather than identifying the problem, doing public penance and making restitution, the Bishops have instead, by and large, attempted to nullify the problem through various meaningless gestures and participate with those
outside the Church who want to make this a cause for more, not less, Liberalism entering into the Church. This Liberalism takes the form of
sex education, which was part of the problem in the first place, increasing more lay involvement and pushing for an end to clerical celibacy, priestesses and an electoral process for Bishops.
In fact, this observation about the moral ineptitude of the Bishops and their conferences is not that controversial or original as Catholic Church Conservation
notes: Cardinal Baggio in 1977 when Prefect of the Congregation of Bishops, addressed the Circulo di Roma, a group of diplomats and intellectuals based in Rome.
While dressing up his assessment of Bishops' Conferences in a generally positive light, he declared that, « as they were entirely human institutions, they reveal grandeurs and servility, ambiguity and contradictions, such as improvisation and inexperience, empiricism, group mentality when it comes to expressing an opinion, bureaucratic and administrative inertia, a refusal to take responsibility, a loss of energy and time- these defective elements lead one to consider sometimes that the Bishops’ Conferences are a aberration of pluralism »
Considering that sex-abuse is far more likely to occur among Protestants, and Jews, this study reiterates the true source of the problem, which is Liberalism and Modernism, sins upon which modern
Judaism and
Protestantism are founded.
Associated Press
Updated: 05/17/2011 11:50:26 PM CDT
WASHINGTON - Researchers commissioned by the nation's Roman Catholic bishops to analyze the pattern of clergy sex abuse over decades have concluded that homosexuality, celibacy and an all-male priesthood did not cause the scandal.
The report from the John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York said about 44 percent of the known abuse cases involved priests who were ordained in the 1940s and 1950s, at a time when seminaries did not properly train them to live a celibate life. These men were not equipped to withstand the social upheaval of the 1960s, which was a time of an increase in sexual deviancy and a spike in crime in society at large, the authors said.
The full report is the last of three studies commissioned by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops as part of child protection reforms adopted in 2002 at the height of the American abuse crisis. Dioceses nationwide have received allegations from more than 15,700 people against about 6,000 clerics since 1950, according to reports John Jay and others compiled for the bishops. The findings are scheduled to be released Wednesday. A person close to the bishops provided a copy to the Associated Press on condition of anonymity since the person was not authorized to release the information.
The debate over what caused the crisis has fallen along ideological lines, with liberals blaming mandatory celibacy or the lack of women in positions of authority. Conservatives pointed to gay priests, since the overwhelming majority of known victims were boys.
The John Jay researchers, however, said that the offenders chose boys mainly because the clergy had greater access to them.
[This is the politically correct thing, of course, denying the obvious link to deviant sexual behavior and mental conditions which lead to the abuse.] According to the researchers, abuse cases peaked in the 1970s, then began declining sharply in 1985, following a similar trajectory for the rate of abuse in society at large.
The bishops hoped the results of the study, which were first reported by Religion News Service, would help them better identify potential offenders. The researchers, however, said they found no "psychological characteristics" or "developmental histories" that distinguished guilty priests from clergy who did not molest children.
"No single 'cause' of sexual abuse of minors by Catholic priests is identified as a result of our research," the authors wrote.
Although the victims studied by the researchers were all legally minors, the authors said only a tiny percentage of accused priests - less than 5 percent - could be technically defined as pedophiles. The John Jay researchers define pedophile as an adult with an intense sexual attraction to prepubescent children. However,
victim advocates have disputed that classification, since boys ages 10-14 were the largest group of known victims, which could include children who had not yet gone through adolescence.
Critics argue the study cannot be trusted since the raw data was provided by the bishops.
In February, a Philadelphia grand jury alleged that the local archdiocese kept 37 credibly accused clergy in public ministry, despite repeated pledges by the nation's bishops that no offenders would stay on duty. In response, Philadelphia Cardinal Justin Rigali suspended about two dozen clergy and hired a former prosecutor to review the cases. Ana Maria Catanzaro, the head of the Philadelphia review board, which was formed to advise bishops on abuse cases, said last week that the archdiocese had "failed miserably at being open and transparent" and had kept some cases from the board.
"What Philadelphia does is reveal the flaws in the process," said Ann Barrett Doyle of the advocacy group
BishopAccountability.org, which is compiling a public database of all records related to the scandal.
The Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests said the study is useless for protecting children because the focus is on priests, not bishops. No bishops have been disciplined by the pope for keeping offenders in ministry without warning parents or police.
Sister Mary Ann Walsh, a spokeswoman for the bishops' conference, said the bishops fully cooperated with the $1.8 million study, which was funded by the bishops, foundations and a grant from the U.S. Department of Justice.
"John Jay was chosen to do the study because of its independence from the church," Walsh said. "John Jay was free to consult whomever they wanted and they did so."
H/t CDL and
Stella Borealis. Link to article,
here.
