This month’s VIRTUS training material reviewed the clever, demonic, and crushing role of silence in the crisis of sex abuse and its cover-up. Especially striking was this description of grooming:

I have heard perpetrators euphemistically refer to the “relationship” they shared with their victim. These were not relationships—they only resembled relationships. They were grooming behaviors carefully orchestrated by a perpetrator to get closer to a child and his or her family. Grooming confuses both the children and the adults in their lives to create a more hospitable environment to commit a vile crime. Any other words soften the reality.

I wish more bishops were aware of this.

Their perpetrator priests are not who they thought they were. They only resembled sons, colleagues, and ministers of the Gospel. In reality, the wool was pulled down tight over many mitres.

The grooming of bishops and other allies in the hierarchy has confused the whole Church. Church leaders experience moral confusion when they harbored predators, shielding them from accountability, and believing the lies about sin and reform and penitence. And protests of innocence. And placing the blame on victims, the media, the faithful laity and priests who were watchdogs on the wolves in the fold.

The more I think about it, the more Bishop Robinson’s urging makes sense to me. Liam’s also. The bishops lack the credibility, knowledge, awareness, wisdom, and perspective to conduct Vatican III on child abuse. A council, if inclusive of the laity, and probably run by us, would go a long way to restoring lost credibility. I don’t think the bishops could possibly accomplish anything in the current climate.

About catholicsensibility

Todd lives in Minnesota, serving a Catholic parish as a lay minister.
This entry was posted in bishops, sex abuse and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to Grooming

  1. LIam says:

    I wouldn’t call it a council; I wouldn’t wish to draw on the canonical precedents that implies, because canon law postdates the era when broader involvement of the faithful was more common.It would be more forthright to have an deliberative-advisory assembly in plain terms – basically, an amplified version of the Pope’s Gang of 8 – the Pope need not keep it extra-legal, but can keep it as a wild card to prod the more established canonical organisms. (Btw, historically before the evolution of the modern nation-state, monarchy as a normal matter would ally with the commons against the aristocracy; it’s the quintessential check-and-balance. Even in republics – think of Optimates (Cato) vs Populares (Caesar).)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s