by VorJack
All of us know about the Catholic child sex abuse scandal that rocked America. Most of us are aware of the same scandal that was reported in Ireland. Well, it looks like Germany may be next.
According to Spiegel Online, there has been a rash of cases that have suddenly come to light:
It started when Berlin’s Canisius College, an elite Jesuit high school, recently disclosed the sordid past of a number of members of the order, who had abused students at the school in the 1970s and 1980s. After that, new victims began coming forward on a daily basis. By last Friday, at least 40 of them had accused three Jesuit priests of molesting children and adolescents, first in Berlin and later at the St. Ansgar School in Hamburg, the St. Blasien College in the Black Forest and in several parishes in the northern German state of Lower Saxony.
That was the start, which brought further scrutiny:
According to a SPIEGEL survey of Germany’s 27 dioceses conducted last week, at least 94 priests and members of the laity in Germany are suspected or have been suspected of abusing countless children and adolescents since 1995.
[...]
A group called the Round Table for Care in Children’s Homes recently published an interim report which contains dramatic findings. [...] According to the report, more than 150 victims of sexual abuse have come forward with their stories in recent months. One of them is a woman who, as a 15-year-old girl, had to sit in the confessional and watch a priest masturbate. When she tried to get away from him, she was beaten by the nuns who ran the home.
The article is long, but worth reading. Since we’ve seen this sort of thing before, the authors are free do more than recount the stories. They lay blame directly on the Catholic hierarchy and call into question the institution of priestly celibacy. Numbers from the US aid their arguments:
There is widespread agreement that this climate of repressed sexuality promotes sexual molestation of children in schools, homes and parishes. A number of studies in the United States conclude that about 2 percent of all Catholic priests are pedophiles.
When applied to Germany, this figure suggests that of a total of 20,000 Catholic clergy, at least 400 could potentially be pedophiles.
Such research has prompted lay movements like “We are Church” to call upon bishops to engage in a fundamental discussion of sexuality. The movement cites a structural problem, in which strict sexual morality and an authoritarian system combine to form a dangerous mix. But the bishops refuse to even entertain such a discussion.
I can hope that Germany turns out to have avoided the sheer number of victims that the US has seen. But I have a sick feeling that this will continue in much the same way, with revelation following revelation as the church is forced to confess its sins.
It amazes me that so many can call christianity a religion of love but you continue to hear more and more of these types of events. I think the thing I find most disturbing is that nuns beat a girl when she didn’t want to watch. How can nuns justify this action within their belief system.
You know what our resident godbots will say: “How can you say that when you’re cherry picking your examples? These cases of sexual abuse are, while utterly horrible and regrettable, not indicative of the general status of Christianity. You’re all so meeeean!”
It’s a religion of love. Dirty sticky pedophile loooove.
The German Bishop Mixa sparked outrage this week for saying the systematic sexual abuse recently uncovered at several Catholic schools could be traced to the promotion of more liberal attitudes towards sex.
“The so-called sexual revolution, in which some especially progressive moral critics supported the legalisation of sexual contact between adults and children, is certainly not innocent,” he told the Augsburger Allgemeine Zeitung.
The Catholic theologian Uta Rank-Heinemann told the website of news magazine Focus on Thursday that Mixa was essentially trying to shirk the blame for the horrible sexual abuse.
http://www.thelocal.de/national/20100219-25369.html
The only response I have to that is “Wtf?”
Let’s see if i got this right:
Some priests are pedophiles. Maybe that is not christianity’s fault at all (that would be an argumentum ad hominem; on another hand, that is showing how hypocritical some of them can be) if, when such a priest is reported, the church were the first to judge him. Instead, catholic church defends him and difficults any further investigation.
And that’s laicism’s fault???
And who supported the legalisation of non-consentual sexual contact between adults and childs???
But of course. Everybody knows that before the sexual revolution there was no rampant sexual abuse of children in, say, Irish orphanages run by the Catholic Church.
And the more liberal attittude to sex is no doubt also to blame for the constant cover-up and denial the Church has always performed whenever one of their clergy is discovered to be a pedophile molester.
Seriously! What a hypocritical piece of shit that guy is.
Given the way the Vatican has addressed the situation in Ireland (essentially by offering meaningless rationalisations and platitudes), one shouldn’t be too hopeful when it comes to the situation in Germany. The issue within the Vatican is a root-and-branch problem, something that the current pontiff has no appetite / ability for whatsoever. Let them stew in their own juices. This issue is going to get worse and worse and worse for them.
I don’t understand how there can still be Catholics. I understand that the vast majority of priests do not harm children and no matter what system the Catholic church has there will be some bad priests but the Catholic church actively tried to hide the abuse, and moved the pedo-priests around which gave them more access to victims. They didn’t even try to place them in a place where the pedo-priests would not have access to potential victims. Thats not just incompetence, that’s an actual fucking conspiracy! Yet there are still people who are Catholic! It’s insane!
Speaking as an ex-Catholic – it’s tough to leave. When you’re raised Catholic you have a lot of baggage that is put on you – a lot of guilt – to keep you in the Church. In some families even marrying a non-Catholic is seen as a “betrayal”. So guilt keeps you in line. Catholic doctrine is kind of harsh about what happens to non-Catholics too, so if you’re not willing to reject it outright that can be a barrier as well.
Plus there’s the personal bias. I am fortunate that none of the priests I’ve ever known were predators. Some of them were assholes, but most of them were fairly nice people who were very into the Catholic “social justice” side of the Church. It can be tough to ignore that personal experience and see that even though those guys were doing good things, the Church as a whole is rotten to the core.
If people would choose they religion thoughtfully, there wouldn’t be religions at all.
Most catholics are catholics because they parents were too and they have been indoctrinated since they were childs.
I left, but I haven’t completely severed my ties. The priests I personally know are just as horrified as everybody else at these pedo-priests, and they’ve taken it as a lesson in why they had to be more resolute in their practices.
They’re genuinely decent folks, and it’s because of them that I tend to reserve my judgement on clergy, at least until they do something really stupid, as was the case on the Vatican’s intentional withholding of information regarding these scandals.
They lay blame directly on the Catholic hierarchy and call into question the institution of priestly celibacy.
This is looking in the right place, and then immediately looking in the wrong place.
The problem IS with the hierarchy, the celibacy issue is much further down on the list. The ultimate problem here isn’t the sexual predators – every organization of any size is going to end up with “bad apples” of some kind from time to time – it’s the fact that the hierarchy of the Church is organized in a way that makes it a juicy target for sexual predators to exploit. The Church will always attempt to cover up a problem before facing it openly – there are hundreds of years of examples of this behavior on record and the current crop of pedophiles is only the most recent ugly set of examples. There is zero transparency in what the hierarchy does, and as long as that is the case the whole structure of the Church is ripe for abuse and corruption and it’s a wonderful place for predators to wriggle their way in and exploit the power they can grab.
The only thing that the Church can do to fix this mess is to open the windows and update their organization from an 11th century one to a 21st century one. Transparency. Independent review boards made up of non-priests. Public meetings. Given its structure the Church can be viewed as a giant corporation – why is it that the Red Cross doesn’t have these problems but the Church does? Those are the fixes that need to be made to the Church to stop this sort of thing from happening.
Won’t happen though. Sunlight is as much an anathema to the Church hierarchy as it is to a common vampire. The guys at the top LIKE their absolute power. The current Pope has been quoted as lamenting the fact that the Papacy doesn’t have the absolute authority it once held centuries ago. There’s no way they’re going to be opening up, which means the slow death to the Church and thousands more victims exploited by predators before she shrivels up into nothingness.
Don’t you dare question the Pope!!!
“The fires of Hell are real and eternal, Pope warns.”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article1572646.ece
It’s commonly said that the “climate of repressed sexuality” within the ranks of Catholic clergy has created this problem. I’ll concede that it might contribute to it — although to what extent, I have no idea — but what really causes the widespread and repeated abuse, is the fact that such behavior is permitted by the Church; the Church has virtually no internal means to deal with it when it happens (except maybe to shuffle abusive priests around); and the Church actively shields abusive priests from (secular) criminal prosecution.
Anytime you place a barrier between people and the law, and prevent the law from holding them accountable for what they do, you effectively encourage sociopathic behavior.
Thus, while eliminating the priests’ celibacy requirement might conceivably help alleviate the problem, what would do much more to prevent it would be to tear down the ecclesiastical-legal wall behind which the abusive priests hide, with the blessing of the Catholic bishops.
Unfortunately I don’t see that happening any time soon. In fact, I wonder if it’s more likely the celibacy requirement will be lifted, rather than the shielding of abusive priests. (And yes, I know the odds of that happening are infinitesimal, as it is.)
“with revelation following revelation as the church is forced to confess its sins”
That’s not the “church”, is a man made religious institution. The church is a spiritual house (as in Psalm 23 David saying “surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life and I will dwell in the “house of the Lord forever and ever”). He didn’t “live in the church/temple 24/7/365″. So he cant be referring to a physical, religious institution. The house of God is a place within a man, his spiritual “house”. This is what David was referring to.
Nice to finally seeing you guys agree with JC, these are the very kind who he had the harshest rebukes for in the NT, the religious types.
John, those guys clame also to be following Jesus’s words (I mean the church, not the pedos).
“Let the children come to me” Mark 10:13-16.
“And they were bringing children to him that he might touch them” Luke 18:15-17
Why would we believe you are the only one who really understand his words?
Isn’t there a bumpersticker that says, “abstinence makes the church grow fondlers”? *snerk*
Ding dong, the Church is dead
Which old Church?
This old Church!
Ding dong the wicked Church is dead!
If Catholicism survives past 2100, Ill be really surprised.
Then again, if I survive to see 2100 I’ll be pretty surprised anyways.
Hmm. I wasn’t aware we were even going to get to Dec. 22, 2012. The Mayans have warned us about that. And we know the Mayans were always right about everything.
;)
There should be a new rule for aspiring Priests…… Castration, while in Seminary! They’re not allowed to be sexually active, so why do they need genitals? So, whether by chemicals or surgery, Priests must, from now on, be made incapable of breaking the taboo on Celibacy. Either that or the implantation of an electronic device that shocks them when any sexual thoughts enter their minds…… Not possible you say, well then, have you ever seen the movie ” A CLOCKWORK ORANGE”? I propose that all priests in training must undergo a similar treatment. In other words.. any time that sexual thoughts enter their heads, they get violently ill! Any time they imagine the rape of a young child, their diaphram seixes yp and stops their breating! A brutal treatment, sure, maybe, but it is also a cure for the problem of CHILD-MOLESTATION by Priests. The church has done a horrible job finding a solution… their main job so far has been ‘Damage Control’. Other than that… I suggest the systematic destruction of the Katholickass church…….. The Curse of the human race!
This is the topic of Fall From Grace (I believe thats what it was) except that focused on the US. All about how the church just moved priests in the US and never did anything about it really. They just covered it up and moved on. All about power and money. They see it as sex no matter if it is with an adult or child, same or opposite sex. I don’t see how the men who are watching or doing anything with young boys are still in the church considering isn’t it a “sin” to lie with another man?
I think Fall From Grace said it all stems from the 400s when the church realized that the priests and what not were giving their property and money to their first born versus the church. Outlaw marriage and kids and you then get all the money and land. Once they did that, the stories of molesting kids started.
It’s actually a little more complicated than that, and there are two separate issues involved, not just one.
First, about the R.C. Church’s unwillingness to cast off wayward priests: That goes back to the Donatist controversy which had torn the northern African church apart in the 4th century. It was caused by the ending of Roman persecutions (by the Edict of Milan, 313) and the subsequent return to the Church of many Christians who had — in order to save their lives — renounced Christianity to Roman officials. While all over the Empire lay Christians were accepted back (after penance), a group of “purists” took control of the see of Carthage, and they refused to allow any back — as clergy — any clergy who’d renounced Christianity. (One of the early “purist” bishops of Carthage was Donatus, and the schism is named for him.) The Donatists’ position was that lapsed clergy were no longer able to perform the sacraments … ever, not even after penance. The Orthodox/Catholic position was that all clergy were welcome back, even to perform sacraments, after penance.
This controversy caused a major rift in the north African church which was never actually resolved; there were Donatist and orthodox churches often in the same town, side by side, for the next few centuries. The rift was still in place when Islam conquered in the 7th century and destroyed both north African churches. The position of the Church everywhere but northern Africa … which included the see of Rome … was that that it was not possible for clergy to ever invalidate themselves (except, I suppose, by resigning outright).
The Roman Catholic Church … and most of the rest of the Christian churches … have all held pretty much the same position, ever since: No clergy can ever “sin” so much that he can never be kept in his office. This reasoning lies behind the R.C. Church’s stubborn refusal to remove these abusive priests from office; to do otherwise might reopen the Donatist schism, and they don’t wish to do that.
As for clergy inheriting their offices … that kept happening well into the Middle Ages, in certain areas — clergy were celibate in some places from fairly early on, but this was by no means universal. This was a problem for bishops and Popes because it prevented them from being able to assign offices to people they wanted to hold them. Too many positions — among the secular clergy — were passing automatically from father to son. This had not been happening among the regular clergy (i.e. monks) because they were ascetics and therefore celibate.
So one of the Gregorian reforms of the 11th century had included a provision to make ALL the clergy — secular AND regular — celibate. Inside of a generation, the problem was gone, and the bishops and Popes were able to extend nepotism fully.
The last factor is yet another medieval consideration, that being a principle known by many names, most often as “benefit of clergy,” or the immunity of clergy to secular prosecution. This is a battle the R.C. Church has waged against monarchs and governments for centuries, and they continue to wage it, even though no major government observes this principle any more. They continue to live in a fantasy world in which their own clergy are answerable only to themselves.
Of course, it’s not as though they had no reason to want this in the first place. Politically-motivated arrests of clergy … meant to harass bishops and Popes … definitely happened in the Middle Ages. So the Church naturally wanted to avoid that. Also, the reason the Church maintains its grip on this philosophy even now, is because there are governments that repress religion and Christianity. The problem is that the R.C. Church expects immunity even from countries … such as nearly every western government … which accepts the Church’s right to exist within its borders and does not repress them.
The Church, however, sees no difference at all between China … where religions are persecuted … and the US, which explicitly guarantees religious freedom. This is, of course, completely irrational. But irrationality is not something the R.C. Church has ever worried about before, so why should they start now?
William Lobdell pointed out another problem too in his book Losing My Religion (or at least I think it is in there, not to that point yet, but he mentioned it when I saw him speak last year). That problem being that the congregation doesn’t want to villianize the priest. He had talked about how (can’t remember if he was just at the church or if it was his, I think it was his) his pastor had come out and said he had molested kids. The congregation gave him a standing ovation and then talked about how they wanted to name a hall after him for being so great and courageous. That is screwed up. It seems as if only the people directly hurt by the pastor and those very close to the victim are the only ones who get angry in the church.
I think it was the movie Doubt that kinda raised another thing in that churches should do their homework on the pastor. They need to know what is coming. I had had a few at that point, but I think it had been a fake, but it is something that they need to do more of. They move these predator pastors around with not a care and the congregations just go with it blindly trusting what is going on (another issue).
Its really too bad as it seems like so much could have been prevented if the church was to actually look at themselves and make the right changes when they were needed.
Pingback: Papal Fallibility | Unreasonable Faith