Fugee Goes To Jail

I see Michael Fugee, the priest who was once barred from contact with minors, then “supervised” in doing so, then barred again, has landed in jail for violating the agreement that appears to have been binding and unconditional after all. Will his bishop follow? From the Newark Star-Ledger editorial:

The prosecutor should press forward with this investigation and consider charging Myers with contempt, as well. This, however, would require a finding that Myers knowingly violated the agreement. Has he been questioned? He should be.

So should others in his inner circle. There can be no free pass for the hierarchy here. At the very least, Myers should step down. His behavior has prompted widespread outrage even within the church, because he repeatedly protected Fugee.

Nothing has surfaced that Michael Fugee molested young people during his “supervision.” Two neighboring dioceses have signed off completely on any notion of it with their own kids.

There are a lot of questions still in the air in this case. How could the Newark archdiocesan review board sign off on returning Michael Fugee to ministry? In some dioceses, the members of the board are publicly known. In about half of US dioceses, they are not. Newark is in the latter category. It’s also in the category in which the bishop appoints the members. Did they know that one admission of a credible abuse situation bars a priest’s return to ministry? Were they even told?

I see that Archbishop Myers spent some time in Poland with CDF head Gerhard Müller. Wonder if they talked about what’s on the fan blades in northern New Jersey.

The thing is that the cult of secrecy in the Church defeats any attempt to generate confidence or restore credibility. News stories about Newark are filled with testimonies of outrage from parents. Parents of kids who were around Michael Fugee until very recently. The mother of his admitted victim from 2002. The archdiocese says it sent communication pertinent to Fugee’s return to ministry. The mother says she never received it. The terms of the Charter may seem harsh (one strike and out) but that wasn’t applied in a case where the accused admitted deeply inappropriate behavior. Did the board get the whole story? Or were facts hidden?

It seems that when the facts do emerge, chanceries fronting the bishops have a very hard time getting the story straight. Mark Silk chronicles the changing tunes of Jim Goodness. Clearly, a reluctant archdiocese remains under scrutiny. Professor Silk outlines it pretty clearly:

I’m guessing that the relevant protocols, if they exist, run along the lines of the Safe Environment Protocol that applies when parish groups use the Archdiocesan Youth Retreat Center in Kearney. That says, among other things, that 10 days before a retreat the pastor in charge must provide the Director of Youth and Young Adult Services with a “listing all chaperones’ names, certifying that all youth ministry leaders and chaperones/volunteers, both Catholic and non-Catholic, from that parish/school have been screened by a third party and safe environment trained, as required by the procedures of this archdiocese.”

Does Mr Goodness sleep at night after a long day of dodging the legal, moral, and ecclesiastical minefields that come with being a spokesperson for an archbishop? I mean: does he knock on his boss’s door and ask, wtf now?

Is this like Lincoln? Where the vigilance against depravity extends to gay men and where the abuse scandal has never darkened the chancery, nor fattened Nebraska lawyers’ profits? Or do we just not know about the dirty, sinful details? Why don’t the bishops realize that they are in a far more difficult situation? They are not dumb men. Nor are they evil. But they are actively driving sheep away from the fold while they protect the wolves within.

 

The Frequently Scheduled One

Grant Gallicho levels a devastating post on the Frequently Misspelled Scheduled One and the active ordinary of his archdiocese. And just when you thought the episcopal attack on the truth couldn’t get any more brazen:

(Archbishop Gomez) does have the authority to say who presides over confirmations in the archdiocese. Have a look at the letter. Sorry, is that link broken? It seems the letter is no longer available on the website of the Archdiocese of Los Angeles. (The L.A. Times cached a copy here.) Odd that the archdiocese’s archive of press releases includes a January 22 apology from auxiliary Bishop Thomas Curry, who played a part in archdiocesan efforts to conceal accused priests from the law (and who really did cancel confirmations this spring), along with Gomez’s statement on the release of the priest-personnel files, dated January 31 — the same date on his statement on Mahony. Did that document disappear down the memory hole?

Money quote from the cardinal when asked by a reporter about his not doing the Confirmation circuit:

That’s news to me…. I’ve been doing them every week and I’m going to be doing them every week. So go home.

And what was it: yesterday the release of the Charter Audit? I wonder if that would disappear from the USCCB web site.

I’m sure Los Angeles teenagers need the Sacrament of Confirmation. But as for the workload of an ordinary and his auxiliaries, it might say something if Southern California bishops went to two-a-week Confirmations as needed and gave up that one night with a cigar and a glass of brandy in a recliner chair. As an example of selfless service and sacrifice, a gesture doesn’t come by that’s much easier than that.

 

Lincoln Still An Outlier

The 2012 annual report on the Charter is up at USCCB. Let’s consult a map:

The USCCB president:

I acknowledge with great appreciation all those who contributed time and effort to this significant achievement. At the same time, we also renew our steadfast resolution never to lessen our common commitment to protect children and young people entrusted to our pastoral care. We seek with equal determination to promote healing and reconciliation for those harmed in the past, and to assure that our audits continue to be credible and maintain accountability in our shared promise to protect and our pledge to heal.

I am happy to share this annual report with you …

Al Notzon, the chairperson of the National Review Board:

It is my understanding that all of the dioceses will be included in next year’s Audit.

That is interesting news. Apparently the new bishop in Lincoln has plans different from his predecessor.

Now, a red spot in the middle of American Catholicism might not mean much. It could be that this central bastion of “orthodoxy” has indeed found the inner purification needed to resist temptation to overpower children, teens, women, and men sexually and emotionally. It could be that Nebraska polices its own clergy and other leaders far more effectively than the whole 20th century bunch of bishops. It could be Cornhusker red bleeding through. Maybe Lincoln children are fine. Maybe.

On the other hand, orthodoxy didn’t have long and strong legs in Newark. Another Midwestern bishop, willing to go to jail for something he didn’t do, begged off the orange jumpsuit for something he did, signing away a bit of his episcopal authority in the process. One post-Charter predator evaded a pretty smart cardinal in another Midwestern diocese. Another skipped the country while his bishop took the weekend off to ponder what to do. And another prominent, and fortunately dead cardinal was thrown under the bus back East when a priest was sent to jail for misdeeds. By the lawyers his very own archdiocese had on the payroll.

Unfortunately for Nebraska parents, they can’t really be sure. A lying edifice wrapping itself in the mantle of innocence and the limit of episcopal power pretty much looks the same as a vigilant community in compliance. Except when the scandal breaks. Then you might find more money laid out for offenders than directly for victim therapy. And you might find a lot more money laid out for lawyers and settlements.

The timing of the Audit report–this could be unfortunate. Those nice preface letters were penned before the Newark chancery went into meltdown and still can’t get its story straight. Newark is in “compliance.” And yet its leadership blundered badly enough to send heads rolling and to call for an archbishop to step down. Archbishop Dolan “assures” us this and other “audits” are credible. He is “happy” to share them.

But the fact is that Catholics are less concerned about clergy these days than their bishops. What are they hiding? Why are they lying? And for those not caught in lies, is it because they are really being truthful with us? Or is it because we haven’t caught them yet?

 

Nobody In Newark Talking

More heat in New Jersey. And a question: is Archbishop Myers a liar? Mark Silk raises this question at RNS.

This is bad, bad, bad, and getting worse for the Newark archbishop. From the archdiocesan web page:

Following the Memorandum of Understanding, the Archdiocese did not assign Fr. Fugee to any post involving ministry with minors.  His assignments were supervised administrative positions located at the Archdiocesan Center in Newark.

Not true. Let’s click them off: that hospital which pulled the plug on chaplaincy when they found out Michael Fugee’s history. Plus this comment from a Newark Catholic:

Fugee was also living at a rectory in Rochelle Park, Bergen County (“In residence”) and also saying Mass as a fill-in around the 4 counties of the AD. So yes, total, utter lies. They have so many stories going now, I don’t think they can keep their lies straight on this one anymore.

“Utter lies” from an archbishop. This story has no nice ending.

More from Professor Silk:

Yesterday, meanwhile, (Newark Star-Ledger‘s Mark Mueller) reported that Fugee had been engaged in youth ministry at a parish in Nutley. This time, Mueller could elicit no comment from Archbishop John J. Myers’ spokesman, Jim Goodness. Which, I suppose, is a step forward for the archdiocese.

Nobody in Newark talking: that’s an improvement?

Father John Bambrick, a Trenton priest, is harshly critical of the prelate:

Essentially, Archbishop Myers has erased 10 years of hard work by the church in the United States to ensure people are safe. He has called into question the integrity of all of us who work so hard to ensure the safety of children, and it’s really disheartening.

The person who caused all this upset is Archbishop Myers, and he’s still in office. It seems like the archbishop needs to take responsibility for his own actions, as everyone else has in this crisis.

I’m giving it another week. I don’t think the US bishops are up to the strain of another brother circling the drain. And taking 200 of them with him.

Legal machinery is in motion from the pre-Newark assignment in Peoria. This is a no-brainer, even for Archbishop Dolan. Somebody calls up Archbishop Myers and they tell him he takes one for the team. I’m sure the call has already been made. If somebody hasn’t done it yet, then we can likely chalk up the last fifteen-some years of episcopal appointments in the US as a near total loss.

 

Consequences

The Fugee fallout in the Trenton diocese hits a parish. And I offer these illustrative points of comparison:

1. Two lay people who were friends of Michael Fugee and who engaged his participation on a youth retreat: fired.
2. Pastor who employed the two youth ministers: sabbatical. (see link above)
3. Bishop who let admitted sex offender loose without much apparent supervision: the Donohue Defense.
4. Cardinal who admitted his role in a scandal of sex and power: exiled.

Granted, not everything has shaken out to a final result. But if you’re keeping score, it’s an interesting card to consider.

On the lay employees’ part, a pretty bone-headed move to be allowing such a priest contact with teens. On the other hand, they didn’t seem to be any less guilty than Archbishop John Myers. So maybe I’ll change my tune regarding his resignation. To be fair, it would seem that the Newark archbishop should be defrocked and laicized. That would about even it up, possibly. And as far as the investment in his education, the Church can wash its hands and say we’ve gotten our money’s worth, eh?

Comments on this one?

 

More Myers and Fugee

Interesting developments in New Jersey. RNS recounts it as Fugee out, Myers still in.

The full piece is in NJ.com:

The Rev. Michael Fugee, who attended youth retreats and heard confessions from minors in defiance of a lifetime ban on such behavior, submitted his request to leave ministry this afternoon, said the spokesman, Jim Goodness. Myers promptly accepted the resignation, Goodness said.

Mr Goodness also conceded:

He engaged in activities that the archdiocese was not aware of and that were not approved by us, and we would never have approved them because they are all in conflict with the memorandum of understanding.

Bill Donohue might consider that “all” of Michael Fugee’s activities were “in conflict.” That’s all of them.

It’s not going to be enough for this priest’s resignation to satisfy. Archbishop Myers, regardless of how Mr Donohue spins the situation, failed in his moral duty to protect innocent persons from very real harm that a sex addict can deliver–a person who concedes one of the main features of an addict’s manifesto, “I am above the rules.”

Did the archdiocese and its bishop know? We don’t know that. If John Myers knew, he owes his flock and the rest of the Church a public confession and apology. Anything less will taint his ministry for a few more years. It will also heap a bit more suspicion on his brother bishops, as Michael Fugee’s antics have stained his diocese. There is no escape from this. None.

There is a reason why sex predators must be dealt with strongly. And I’m sure that from within the clerical subculture, it seems harsh.

Mark Crawford of SNAP:

Father Fugee should have been fired and removed from ministry by Archbishop Myers years ago, not simply allowed to resign today.

This is right. Michael Fugee, despite his past crimes and sins, showed a measure of self-sacrifice by giving up a ministry that I presume was meaningful to him.

More from Mr Crawford:

If the Archbishop went to such great lengths to protect Father Fugee, then it’s likely he may be protecting others. He has failed to be transparent, open and honest, and for that Archbishop Myers must step down.

The archbishop may well be gravely co-dependent. By this I mean he may possess a personality that aligns with addicts in his life–family, friends, clergy, whomever. His resistance is suspect. He may have been seriously groomed by his clergy, and he may well be unaware of it. Abusers will groom allies to help and support them in their efforts to prey on victims. This grooming is no less serious than the grooming of victims, and becomes part of the addict’s defense. Consider the way the story from the archdiocese has shifted over the past few days. On Monday, Michael Fugee was being properly supervised on those youth events. And now those same implied activities are “not approved.” This is part of the shifting ground of truth and lie that addicts and their co-dependents weave when they are confronted by the truth.

Must Archbishop Myers step down? He remains the best man to respond to that.

If he is a co-dependent or if he is at all unsure, one possible route would be to get into Al-Anon or CoDA and do two things. Acquaint himself with the world of addiction and how insidious its tentacles can be. Check his experience with people he can trust: other recovering individuals who have enabled the pathological behavior of addicts in their lives. Only the archbishop can settle that matter.

My own sense is that for the good of the Catholic Church in Newark, the best course may well be to step down. But if he’s got a better idea, let him go for it. I do know that continued silence and stonewalling is not going to help anyone. It certainly will not further the Gospel of Jesus Christ in the counties of Essex, Union, Hudson and Bergen.

 

More Heat for +Myers

It’s coming at the archbishop on many fronts.

North New Jersey parents are ticked off. A wayward priest, forgiven by his archbishop, was with their kids. This is predictable, and justifiable anger.

It’s complete craziness that the church can let this happen. I’m a softball coach, and I need a background check just to get on the field. Every single person I spoke to today said, ‘Oh my God. I didn’t know about this.’ It’s incomprehensible.

Incomprehensible is about right. I could place an expletive adverb before the word, but otherwise, about right.

And neighboring bishops have weighed in against Fr Fugee, and by extension, their metropolitan. First Trenton:

Bishop David O’Connell has ordered the pastor of St. Mary (where Fr Fugee has been in active ministry) to bar (him) from any church activities, a spokeswoman said in a statement.

That’s no activities, not even under supervision. So much for the interpretation of keeping a watchful eye on offenders.

And Paterson:

(Bishop) Arthur Serratelli, has likewise said Fugee was on a retreat at Lake Hopatcong without his permission.

He might have gotten MR3 wrong, but this was even more of a no-brainer.

SNAP, of course, is calling for the pink slip. Mark Crawford, state director:

The archbishop continues to insist it’s fine for Fugee to work with children. It’s a very dangerous message. When will it be enough? When someone gets hurt? What does it take when you have a man who has admitted groping a child on more than one occasion?

It has already tripped up bishops like Francis George. And it could have been worse for Robert Finn.

Father James Connell is appealing to Rome:

The truth in this crisis has to come to light or we will never have true justice. We cannot expect there to be healing for the victims and survivors if we do not have that truth.

So now Cardinal Gerhard Müller is on the griddle for this, too. Good.

At this point, I feel nearly desensitized to the institution and its defenders. Blind traditional Catholicism is a spent husk. It has no heart. It’s lost its head. Entrails come to mind.

John Myers rode into Peoria a quarter-century ago as the hero for a return to a rosy pre-conciliar Catholicism. Like a number of others of his ilk he has demonstrated that the self-styled orthodox have no high ground where virtue and morality are concerned. They seem focused on the problems of others, yet blind to their own weaknesses. It is absolutely essential that a leader in ministry be aware, even to the point of personal pain, what his or her shadows and weak points are. Someone like John Myers has been in ministry for decades. He might be an archbishop. But he doesn’t escape from the reality of sin and a refusal–a blank refusal–to come to grips with his problem here. We might treat Robert Finn a little differently for his naivete, though he gets demerits for not researching his own pastoral letter on pornography. Archbishop Myers was found wanting in 2002, and it clearly hasn’t changed in the last decade.

At this point, I also don’t care if he resigns or not. I feel fairly sure that New Jersey Catholics will be hyper-sensitized to watching for predators on the loose. Perhaps a stray priest or two will be suspect. That’s the sad fallout from all this. Any cleric who gets a new assignment will have a few parents wondering and questioning. So the clergy of Newark can send a thank-you note to their bishop for that one. But I don’t think a predator is going to get loose from the Newark clergy. the people simply will not stand for it.

And I think I’m fine with the man remaining on the cathedra for another three years, as a reminder for a lot of people not to look to human beings, princes, or the self-styled orthodox as savior. Jesus is savior. There is no other. For all the finger-pointing at Muslims and the nones and the other non-Catholics, it seems that bishops themselves have some serious deficiencies with the Catholic faith. Good thing we rely on the Lord, and not the shepherds.

 

Is Newark the Next Kansas City?

Rock has this piece on his Twitter feed today. It doesn’t look good for Archbishop Myers in New Jersey. A priest of his archdiocese entered into a binding legal agreement to avoid a retrial for criminal sexual contact.

(He) would not work in any position involving children, the agreement with the Bergen County Prosecutor’s Office states. He would have no affiliation with youth groups. He would not attend youth retreats. He would not hear the confessions of minors.

But (he) has openly done all of those things for the past several years through an unofficial association with a Monmouth County church, St. Mary’s Parish.

And the Newark Star-Ledger has photos with their article that seem to show it.

Youth retreats: check.

Youth pilgrimage: check.

Youth confessions: check.

Even the hospital where he was assigned as a chaplain in 2009 didn’t want him when they found out about the criminal charges.

The archbishop’s spokesperson, Jim Goodness has his own bullet points on the matter. Fr Fugee is a victim. He’s been supervised wherever he’s served Catholic youth. His agreement was not to be around young people without supervision. His position overseeing continuing formation of clergy is a “pencil-pushing job.” Not something serious, it seems.

To a degree I feel a small amount compassion for the priest. He’s about my age, and he can never serve as a parish pastor. The Catholics of his diocese, and presumably his bishop, have invested a lot in his education and formation. What on earth can you do with a guy like this? Let him push pencils for another two decades? Suppose he is a sex addict in recovery. How can he find meaningful work in accord with his gifts that will allow him to escape from the cycles of shame and addiction? The man deserves a crack at that. He got his second chance to remain a priest and to function as such. But he seems to have pushed back against the rules. It’s a common quality of addicts: they will claim they are above the rules. So what kind of guy do we have here?

The archdiocese said he served as a confessor on a youth retreat only as a last-minute replacement. And only for a few hours. A deacon who was present too. The priest spent extended time with young people, including hearing their confessions “behind closed doors.” Deacon Paul Franklin described himself as “flabbergasted.”

If I had known (his full history), I would have objected immediately. The fact that he is apparently violating this agreement makes me wonder if he was going to honor other agreements. It creates a suspicion.

This is on Archbishop Myers, this suspicion. This is the basic definition of scandal. It is a moral matter of grave seriousness. Archbishop Myers has a long-standing rep as one of those “loyal, orthodox” bishops. But like his brother in Kansas City, he seems to have a moral blind spot where his clergy are concerned. Will it come back to bite him? The editorial board of the paper is calling for his resignation. One self-described “devout Catholic, whom (sic) defends the faith at all cost,” wrote:

I can’t disagree, that if all that is alleged is true, Meyers (sic) must resign.

The legal agreement itself states:

The Archdiocese shall not allow him to minister to any minor/child under the age of 18 or work in any position in which children are involved.

That seems pretty clear. No wiggle room for supervision. It sure looks like Archbishop Myers is headed for the hot seat on this one. And Newark is going to get Kansas City-ugly before it’s over.

 

Pope Francis Friday

CNS reported on Pope Francis meeting with B16′s CDF head. As reported, sisters and theologians were not on the docket, but praise for the movement to addressing sex predators.

For the defenders of the innocent, all eyes will be on the Holy Father to see what he does with bishops who were snookered by sex addicts. This has been where the antigospel has erupted most grievously in the hierarchy, probably more even than its treatment of women.

Speaking of which, I was noticing the hand-wringing over the Marini “brothers” here. Will the old MC get his job back? Somehow, I doubt it. Once Msgr G Marini has finished up his job, wouldn’t it be delicious if Pope Francis hired a lay liturgist to run pontifical ceremonies? A woman. In an alb. If you thought the fuss over washing the feet of Muslim girls was harsh …

 

‘He is not to come to this church any more.’

The various news reports surrounding the new pope are entertaining. Does he have one lung or two? Was he soft on South American fascism? I like this one: Cardinal Law ejected from Santa Maria Maggiore.

So hearing that the new Pope was offering prayers at the very same church, it seems (Cardinal Law) couldn’t resist a discreet peak.

But when Pope Francis recognised him, he immediately ordered that Law be removed, according to Italian media reports. He went on to command: ‘He is not to come to this church any more.’

One of the new Pope’s first acts will be to arrange new ‘cloistered’ accommodation for the disgraced cardinal, the Italian daily, Il Fatto Quotidiano, reported.

I have to admit that fifty-some hours into this pontificate, they’re laying the legend on a little thick. Pope Francis is no superhero. But after a long hierarchical winter, I have to ask what’s up with the paying hotel bills, breaking out of the six-candlestick-prison, and now the banishment of Cardinal Law. Do I want to wake up under the rule of Pope Pius XIII?

Mark Silk is upping the ante a bit. He wants to see my former bishop ejected from Kansas City.

If Francis wants to make as much of a mark by his handling of the abuse scandal as he has by his simple lifestyle, he’s got a ready-made opportunity. Last September, Bishop Robert Finn of Kansas City was convicted of a criminal misdemeanor for failing to report one of his priests for possible sexual abuse of children. Thus far, neither the Vatican nor the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops has so much as issued a statement on the matter.

It’s one thing to move a disgraced eighty-something into new lodgings. It’s another to reach past a national conference and do what should be done on the local level: American bishops taking their colleague aside and suggesting they will not stand in his way if he wants early retirement. Then the man steps down.

With respect to Professor Silk, I am not in favor of the pope removing bishops. I wasn’t in favor of it with the arrogant and juvenile handling of Bill Morris. I wouldn’t approve of it with Robert Finn. If Bishop Finn doesn’t resign, I’m okay with an Opus Dei bishop to continue serving for fifteen years as an example of conservative ideology run amok. I doubt he will transgress and endanger children again–that would mean prison time, and not the Cardinal George version of unjust incarceration. A lot of people will be watching.

When I read this criticism of careerism and vanity, I feel hopeful:

The cardinalate is a service is, it is not an award to be bragged about. Vanity, showing off, is an attitude that reduces spirituality to a worldly thing, which is the worst sin that could be committed in the Church. This is affirmed in the final pages of the book entitled Méditation sur l’Église, by Henri De Lubac. Spiritual worldliness is a form of religious anthropocentrism that has Gnostic elements. Careerism and the search for a promotion come under the category of spiritual worldliness. An example I often use to illustrate the reality of vanity, is this: look at the peacock; it’s beautiful if you look at it from the front. But if you look at it from behind, you discover the truth… Whoever gives in to such self-absorbed vanity has huge misery hiding inside them.

Good message from the red hat meet-up. Pope Francis and Cardinal Tagle and the Jovial One all having a good laugh. Hopefully they talked about how the Church is going to reinvigorate its spiritual life. That would be something with which I’m on board.

 

Survivor Fatigue

I’m not surprised activists pounding on the Church’s lack of accountability have gotten tired over the past eleven years. It’s a thankless job. It’s as complex a tangle of issues as one can find. And there’s likely differences of opinion on strategy within the movement/s. Ann Hagan Webb’s comment struck me:

I went from trying to change the church to accepting the fact that they won’t [change], and anyone that’s still in the church has blinders on. At this point, my opinion is they are corrupt to the core and there’s not a single cardinal we can find who would be a good pope because there’s no such animal.

The American delegation to the conclave would seem to be tainted. The Frequently Misspelled One has a reputation in ruins outside of people who cheered his smackdown by Mother A. Cardinals George and Rigali have at times bypassed structures intended to watchdog abusive clergy. Despite his jovial approach to sooth controversies, Archbishop Dolan has also been knocked around a bit by those who question his management priorities connected with abuse settlements.

A few people I know who have been active in the political pro-life movement have also felt the burden of time–a few more decades. They generally benefit from the support of the institution. Bishops who have sided with victims and allies, however, are few and far between.

Another factor that might account for fatigue in the movement is the modern indulgence for victimhood. Note carefully the public language of people: those who suffered abuse, their allies, bishops, clergy, the media. Do they speak of victims, or of survivors. It’s not necessarily important that they know the difference. I’ve known many courageous people who were abused as children or adults, but who triumphed over the demons planted in them and who can say they are stronger today, not weaker.

People in power and people with power might find it convenient to refer to “victims,” as it can bolster their own sense of superiority and more readily dismiss the protests, and therefore the calls for institutional change.

I believe that abuse survivors and activists can point to more progress than political pro-lifers. Lay people have taken abuse far more seriously. There are teachers, administrators, lay ministers, and parents who are trained and are keeping close watch on suspicious behavior. Nobody is given a free pass these days–not bishops or pastors–not anyone. And the secular media is prepared to nose out a story and follow it to the limits.

These are all good things, and progress has been made that is noticeable and more importantly, is largely preventative. The ultimate goal is the prevention of child abuse, and we’ve accomplished that by the tens of thousands at least. And the College of Cardinals? They are only 115. For those entrusted with the direct and sacramental shepherding of the innocent? We number in the millions. We don’t care that bishops don’t get it. Eventually they will retire and die. And new people will move into their places. The worst case scenario is that they still won’t get it, but there will only be a few thousand of them. The drumbeat continues, and won’t stop, I believe. Not as long as there are parents vigilant for the welfare of their children, plus caring allies who have their eyes open.

 

Cardinal Turkson Doesn’t Get It

RNS linked Cardinal Peter Turkson’s CNN interview. He steered the conversation well from the political concerns of the day, and focused on the essential of the Gospel.

And this, at the 7:05 (question)/7:31 (answer) mark:

When Amanpour asked Turkson about the possibility of the Catholic Church’s sexual abuse scandal spreading to Africa, he said it would unlikely be in the same proportion as it has in Europe.

“African traditional systems kind of protect or have protected its population against this tendency,” he said. “Because in several communities, in several cultures in Africa homosexuality or for that matter any affair between two sexes of the same kind are not countenanced in our society.”

A troubling answer. Cardinal Turkson misses on two points.

First, that sex abuse isn’t about same sex attraction as much as it about using sexuality to dominate, humiliate, and impose upon the innocent. There is probably nothing more intimate and personal than a person’s sexuality. Throwing out the gay thing is just a smokescreen.

Second, the scandal is less in the misconduct of clergy and much more in the mismanagement of predators. Could she have asked him about bishops who had mishandled wayward clergy? That would have been an interesting exchange to see.

He does concede the restoration of credibility is very needful. But he doesn’t address the problem of bishops.

I’ve seen commentary that Cardinal Turkson is too much in the news, and has campaigned his way out of consideration by his fellow cardinals. I think that if he were elected, he would need to listen to the facts and learn of the situation. Africa is not Eden. The powerful in Africa have certainly used sex to exert domination over the innocent, the weak, and the vulnerable. African bishops have not avoided their own sexual escapades.

I wish the interviewer had been more incisive and better researched on these points. At least Cardinal Turkson recognizes the credibility gap. That he doesn’t take it for granted suggests the higher-ups in Rome don’t count on it either. That can be a good thing.

 

What Is The Benedict Legacy on Sex Abuse & Cover-Up?

Middle-Eastern tribal traditions get something of a pass in the Old Testament for patriarchs from Abraham to Solomon. Multiple wives, concubines, and the royal treatment do not exactly match up the Christian ideal of one man, one woman. Such were the expectations of the day, that aristocrats and the considerations of wealth and power overshadowed any sort of monogamous ideal. As I’ve read through Genesis in my daily lectio these past several months, I give thumbs down on Abraham’s attempt at an heir through Hagar. Or Jacob fathering children through concubines–for him, four was definitely not enough.

I suspect that society’s handling of child sexual abuse will continue to evolve, and we will see a future in which the 20th century will seem as quaint/weird/immoral as these aspects of Genesis strike us today. Part of that “qwi” will apply to the Church’s handling of predator clergy and the bishops who covered up their crimes. I suspect that in future generations, people will condemn bishops deep in the cover-up as Israelites might look at Ishmael and his pagan wives. As for leaders like Pope Benedict who were slow to react to the magnitude of scandal, it might be more like how we view a practice like polygamy today.

We don’t condemn Abraham, Jacob, and others for their multiple wives. But we don’t imitate them either.

As both CDF head and pope, Joseph Ratzinger won’t be condemned for not acting vigorously enough on sin within the ranks of priests and bishops. Is this right? I think so. According to the Church’s teaching on natural law, the behavior of Solomon, David, Jacob, and Abraham in taking multiple wives was sinful. Abraham was rightly worried that the promised nation of descendants would never happen. Now, we know God is powerful enough that he could raise a nation from the very grains of sand on the seashore. But our Father in faith saw the need to be proactive. Did first wives Sarah or Leah carry resentments and bitterness? If so, the male authors of the Bible do not reveal. Was their behavior wrong? We have to say it: most definitely.

Indeed, the bishops themselves are largely blind to the sinful aspects of cover-up, and how that has contributed to an erosion of the Gospel and a weakening of the voice of Christ among believers and others. And how it has damaged victims, survivors, and their allies. Like it or not, Pope Benedict has been no Tom Doyle, no SNAP, no VOTF on this.

In another hundred years, we will likely be honoring the legacy of Joseph Ratzinger/Pope Benedict in the positive accomplishments of his service to the Church. The slow pace of realizing the deep, deep sin of the bishops will have been realized. But I suspect that other heroes will be cited–not the pope embarrassed by Ireland, Belgium, Germany, Australia, the US, etc..

Is this right? I don’t know. Catholics would feel better about the papacy and the Church if it had been the pope leading the way, and not voices in the wilderness. But fallible human beings make flawed choices. Not everyone has the foresight for full clarity in this matter.

 

On The Clock?

The Goodbye Bad Bishops site* seems to have been taken over by the Chinese, but if any fisheaters are still keeping track, I wonder if they will put longtime conservative darling Archbishop John Myers on the clock for his latest chancery appointment?

* A web site that pictured disliked bishops and attached a countdown to retirement for each. I last saw it a few years ago.

 

CDF Not Getting It, Prequel

Grant Gallicho’s compare and contrast at dotCommonweal draws a good bit of commentary. The 2002 CDF position, channeled by Cardinal Ratzinger, is up for a dollop of criticism. Here it is:

But I am personally convinced that the constant presence in the press of the sins of Catholic priests, especially in the United States, is a planned campaign, as the percentage of these offenses among priests is not higher than in other categories, and perhaps it is even lower. In the United States, there is constant news on this topic, but less than one percent of priests are guilty of acts of this type. The constant presence of these news items does not correspond to the objectivity of the information or to the statistical objectivity of the facts. Therefore, one comes to the conclusion that it is intentional, manipulated, that there is a desire to discredit the church.

I’m disinclined to suggest the cardinal had more information 11 years ago and was just obfuscating. I’m more inclined to suggest Cardinal Ratzinger wanted these items to be true. He may well have had suggestions, evidence, or even a survey that contraindicated. But even a smart man can be toppled by his own wishes and hopes.

What he sniffs on that last conspiracy theory is the reality in modern media, even Catholic media, and even among high-placed believers.

Rather than blame ourselves, we will indulge the plank and suggest it is our opponent who is blinded.

The media doesn’t hone in on Catholicism alone. It is geared to sell product. In order to sell, it must, like advertising, draw attention to itself. It draws attention by trumpeting news of impact. When high-placed people do lowdown things (Bill Clinton’s affairs, Martha Stewart’s investment improprieties) it attracts attention. Sometimes, as in the case of Bill Clinton, the figure is brought to the brink of consequences. Martha Stewart went over, if you remember your celebrity history. But the financial geniuses who engineered the crisis of September 2008 were never dragged to the cliff. Draw what lessons, conspiratorial or otherwise, from that as you will. Maybe if money talks outside the Church, it speaks loudly from within its walls too.

Now, Cardinal Ratzinger went on to become pope. One can trust his present-day facts are a little straighter than they were before election. Father Oliver is two levels removed from the papacy. At least. So kudos to the press may not get a Ratzinger glare.

If only we can get an admission on the percentage of active bishops who have shielded predators. That number, I suspect, is in the double digits. And that, my friends, remains the crux of the Catholic problem of blindness to sin, institutional mismanagement, and the efforts of the antigospel. Good luck, I say, getting to the bottom of that cesspool.