"We had some kind of friendship. I was very friendly with him and his family," said [Anthony] Mercieca. "Then almost forty years passed without him saying anything. . . . And now because he got caught he recited these things."Oh, those priests, with their subtle reasoning.
In Brazil "they skinny dip all the time and no one gets scandalized. It is part of the culture. It is natural," Mercieca said. "They don't make an issue out of a skinny dip in the park or a massage."
"It was not what you call intercourse. . . . There was no rape or anything. . . . Maybe light touches here or there," said Mercieca.
१९ ऑक्टोबर, २००६
"The whole idea is . . . that I did something that he did not like, but at the time he did not say anything."
Says the priest who admits to what ex-Congressman Mark Foley said he did.
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
३७ टिप्पण्या:
Yesterday, I resisted the urge to post about the "revelation" that Foley would "out" the priest, but I have to say -- why would we care? Are we caring about that now? Does it somehow make what Foley did okay if he may or may not have been abused as a child? Every criminal and malcontent has an excuse, but one thing I've learned as I've gotten older is that everyone is damaged, to one extent or another, for one reason or another, and yet millions of damaged people manage to get through life without killing / raping / maiming people or attempting to bugger teenage boys. I'm sorry for him if Foley was abused, but that's not an excuse for what he did.
I think bringing up the priest is lame as Stephen B. indicates, but I don't think a priest ought to be saying things like oh, he's only blaming me because he got caught. He should be taking full responsibility for what he did wrong... and more. I'm not a Catholic, but that's how I read the Gospels.
Does anyone really take Dave seriously any more, at least when the topic is religion?
Dave said...
"Does anyone really take Catholicism seriously any more?"
Well, there are 1,098,366,000 catholics in the world, but as for how many of them take it seriously is hard to say. John Kerry claims to be a catholic, so I'm betting it's at most 1,098,368,999 people. At aminimum, it's still a lot more than take the Democratic party seriously.
I think most Catholics take it very seriously - I know I do - far more seriously than secular humanism or Scientology for example.
The fact that the priest was - is - a lowlife doesn't exempt Foley for his actions no matter how much he wants us to believe it does. Of course the same goes for alcoholism and most other excuses for not exercising some personal responsibility.
The bozo from Gozo.
Well I'll be damned -- I thought for sure Foley had made the whole thing up.
Are there any institutions that are not corrupt?
That's not rhetorical.
I lay the responsibility for this priest’s twisted notions on sex right on the doorstep of the Catholic Church’s absurdly repressive doctrine on human sexuality...
Is it possible that individuals are accountable for their own actions? That might explain why it isn't just Catholics who are perverts.
-at least the rigid fundamenatlist right wingers can blame it on the Catholic Church now and keep on voting the GOP ticket. There'll be a priest in that 'outed' Senator's closet too, in their minds. They'll say we get rid of our pervs, the Dems applaud theirs who have sex with 17 yr. olds and let them keep their jobs. That business has yet to play out and rack up its political mileage.
But I still don't understand how an organized religion [the Catholic Church] can be so replete with clueless leaders.
Have you read the Bible? The Jews in the OT, the Christians in the NT, plenty of cluelessness. Heck, you even have Judas, one of the apostles, betraying Jesus.
Human frailty is nothing new inside or outside of religion. It doesn't bear on the Deposit of Faith.
Dave, are you going to respond to the good priest or was you ad hominem attack on the Church an end in itself?
While it is certainly true that Brazilians are not hung up on sex as are Amerikans, skinny dipping and nudism in general are NOT common in Brazil. Indeed, there are only 5 official nudist beaches and a few where nudism is tolerated.
The machismo of the Brazilian male is the main impediment, as he cannot stand the idea of his girl's being seen naked by other men. The result is that Brazilian men, who prefer to hang out fully clothed and stare, are barred from the woman-and-couples-only parts of nudist beaches, such as Praia do Pinho in Santa Catarina. We who are still waiting for the liberation of the Brazilian male consider Mercieca to be feinting with damn praise.
Simon says
...one thing I've learned as I've gotten older is that everyone is damaged, to one extent or another, for one reason or another...
That is so true. Distorting his point a bit, it reminds me of how Native Americans lament that Europeans came here and took the land and infected the population and I think, "Well has not happened the world over, since day one? Who has not suffered in history? The abuse is constant."
The thing then, is to not add to the suffering, as the cycle tends to go on and on unless people actually opt to do something different, or do something right.
Christianity, including Catholicism, is supposed to function as a little inflection point in the mind and hearts of man, helping them to actually "do something different."
The priest is dead right when he points out Foley's hypocrisy in bringing up the issue. But isn't it sad that a priest was even part of the cycle of suffering, and rather justifies it.
This is not merely a Catholic problem (bad priests) or a Christian one, but carries over into all parts of life (As in the massive option backdating scandal in our "Corporate Church" that is causing CEO after CEO to step down in the face of escalating government investigations).
Abuse.
The huge number of sexual predator cases involving priests reveals a systemic problem in the Church...
No, it shows what a juicy target the Catholic Church is. It is the single largest provider of child-related services in this country, and in the world.
We don't hear so much about children abused by public school teachers or by clergy members of other faiths because there's no upside to suing. (Is it even possible to sue the public school system if your kid is abused by a public school employee? I don't think so.) I can't speak to criminal prosecutions of these cases because I don't know how much of that actually goes on... because it's rarely reported.
As Fr. More said, we Catholics have plenty to be angry about. But people who think that the corruption is widespread and complete lack perspective on just how big the Catholic Church is.
And on the flip side, the Church is now instituting policies that are hyper-vigilant to prevent a culture of abuse from ever flourishing again. I recently participated in my parish's "Called to Protect" training which was excellent, if horrifying at times in the discussion of how child molesters typically operate. This program stresses that it is the responsibility of every parish staff member -- whether volunteer or paid -- to be alert to the signs that predation is taking place, and to never allow it. It was, above all, useful information, and not the "CYA" training that typified previous programs. This year, in our parish, every single volunteer in every single ministry, even those not directly working with minors, has to take this training, and they will be screened and their references checked. This is a huge (and expensive) undertaking but it's necessary to make sure that predators don't use the Church to find new victims. (Why would they use the Church? Because that's where the kids are.)
Oh, those priests, with their subtle reasoning.
As if priestly training includes how to be a weasel and avoid taking responsibility for your own actions. I won't blame the priesthood for this man's lack of character, but I will blame the authorities who allowed him to become a priest in the first place.
There is so much misrepresentation and misunderstanding of the quote “priest pedophile” controversy. Many would love to blame the hierarchy and the Church's understanding of human sexuality. Neither washes given the facts.
#1. Most cases were not pedophilia (pre-pubescent) but rather pederasty. (post pubescent young people) what is sometimes called ephebophile . Yes, pederasty is much more common then pedophilia. Its an important distinction. Although both are heinous, pedophilia is more so, and much more rare. Pederasty is much more common and has greater cultural sway- with the sexualizing of youth. I would think a pederast to be deviant and perverted but not monstrous like a pedophile.
#2 Over 80% of the incidents were of Priest Pederasty of young males.
#3. Its important to note that the overall numbers sighted are over a 40 year period. The worst abuse (shear #’s) occurred in the late 70’s and early 80’s. After that the Bishops started to get a handle on the problem.
#4. Context is important. The overall problem of Pederasty is quite common. The most incidents occur between young women and their mothers boyfriends/live in lovers (as apposed to natural Fathers) The incidents occur in equally high numbers in any field were adults have close contact with minors. This includes other denominations (that have always had a Married Priesthood) like Episcopalians & Lutherans. Evangelicals have had the same problem with choir directors and youth ministers. Indeed the problem persists in organizations like Big Brothers/Big Sisters, the Boy Scouts, Athletic Coaches (especially wrestling) and so forth.
#5. For varying reasons the media chose to present this as an institutional problem, rather than separate incidents; and blur the distinction between Pedophilia and Pederasty.
This can best be illustrated when compared with the (by far) greatest number of incidents of Pederasty within a given organization. (or outside the home)
#6.Public Schools by sheer numbers have vastly larger incidents of Pederasty within the ranks of Teachers, Administrators & Coaches. Yet the media always portrays it as a individual/isolated problem and not as an institutional wide phenomena (like they did the Church incidents)
When the stories of the attractive women seducing young men made the news it was…
A) Not called “Pedophile Teachers”
B) Not presented as a problem with our Public Schools
The comparison is even more glaring because (for a number of reason) Like the Catholic Church, the Public Schools can be said to be both “covering it up” & “moving pederasts from school to school.”
The reasons for this are multiple – The seriousness of the charge makes leveling it at an individual difficult/momentous – Both Victim, Perpetrator, & Victims family have an interest in not prosecuting/following through, and getting on with their lives – Sexual crimes are notoriously underreported – they are also hard to prove, becoming one person word against another, Union Rules make firing teachers difficult, & burdens of proof require substantial evidence. People look out for their own & protect adults & their carrers/reputations (this is hopefully changing)
Dave
“BTW, if anyone doubts the thesis that Republican political operatives could care less about your religious values,”
I’m sure they “disparage” Christian leaders in private, & business leaders, and anti-immigration leaders, and fiscal conservatives, and Libertarians… When you work at the White House everybody has their hand out. Its easy to resent them.
The Democrats have the same Hostility/Resentment to members of their own base.
Religious conservatives know that the Republican party is neither a bastion of conservative morality nor a den of true believers. They are sophisticated individuals however and won’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good. They know they are better represented by republicans and have a greater chance of geeting their agenda through Republican politicians.
jim,
i'm not sure what brazil you've been too, but the beaches i was on were full of topless women.
unless you're constraining your argument purely to full nudity? obviously that is not common, that would be gross.
cheers.
"Is it even possible to sue the public school system if your kid is abused by a public school employee? I don't think so."
Well, I'm not so sure that you can't. Sovereign immunity "does not extend to suits prosecuted against a municipal corporation or other governmental entity which is not an arm of the State," Alden v. Maine, 527 U.S. 706, 756 (1999), so I suppose the question would turn on whether a public school is a creature of county government (because schools are usually organized by counties) or state government (because schools are usually organized by counties at the non-negotiable behest of states). And in fact, there may not actually be one, single right answer: "[t]he issue [of whether a school board is immune from suit] ... turns on whether the Mt. Healthy Board of Education is to be treated as an arm of the State partaking of the State's Eleventh Amendment immunity, or is instead to be treated as a municipal corporation or other political subdivision to which the Eleventh Amendment does not extend. The answer depends, at least in part, upon the nature of the entity created by state law." Mt. Healthy City Board of Ed. v. Doyle, 429 U.S. 274, 280 (1977). If there was anything to the argument that a school district can't be sued, I would think that would have been thrown against Michael Newdow in Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow, 542 U.S. 1 (2004).
Fitz makes good distinctions. I was talking with my Lutheran pastor about how it all happened that so many peds (since it's not clear whether they are pederasts or pedophiles but the shortened term neatly includes both) and he said that back then lesbian nuns had been put in charge of hiring, and they tended to prefer gay men.
Fitz mentions that there are Lutheran priests who have done similar things.
I think this must be very rare. OF course it happens, but it's not a church-wide problem.
We had a problem with a pastor in Texas. After that it was difficult to find insurance for that church, so that eventually it was closed.
But it's not a church-wide problem insofar as I know.
Our pastors are allowed to be married and have normal sexual lives and to have children.
We don't know what the percentage of priests with a non-heterosexual orientation is inside of the American Catholic church. Some have suggested that it is well over 80%, others less than half.
But Lutherans are nowhere near that number.
Simon
I think Joan’s point was in the spirit of “you can’t fight city hall”.
Sovereign immunity presents a great enough hurdle to discourage massive litigation like the Church suits. The media environment (as stated above) helps prime juries and judges toward bigger/easier suits as compared with public schools.
The amount and expectations of awards are also greatly diminished when suing a public school. Judges routinely knock down excessive awards on the theory that the taxpayers cannot be held responsible. Functionally public institutions have never been a rich target for lawsuits.
Most Biblical exegesis places Mary's age at between 13 and 16 when Christ was born.
So lighten up on pedophile priests...they're just following the example of Our Father.
Simon:
I may be a little rusty on sovereign immunity, but I don't know that it prevents suits for injunctive relief, nor would it prevent a suit that is technically against an individual administrator rather a school district. Either or both of those exceptions may apply to Newdow.
However, in addition to possible sovereign immunity protection, many states have tort immunity statutes on the books that make it difficult to recover damages against school districts. While these laws don't generally provide complete immunity, their practical effect is to make the prospect of going after a public entity less appealing and dramatically to reduce damage awards.
Kirby Olsen
“Fitz mentions that there are Lutheran priests who have done similar things. I think this must be very rare. Of course it happens, but it's not a church-wide problem.
I know it was a wide problem for the Episcopalians, (who have married Priests) but did not get anywhere near the coverage. Part of this is acceptable given the much smaller number of Lutherans and Episcopalians plus less institutions like schools & hospitals with access to children.
“Our pastors are allowed to be married and have normal sexual lives and to have children.”
There is nothing to indicate that the practice of celibacy itself “causes” pederasty. As stated most happens within the home & is male on female. Incest is rare however, its mostly Boyfriends of unmarried women and their daughters.
“We don't know what the percentage of priests with a non-heterosexual orientation is inside of the American Catholic church. Some have suggested that it is well over 80%, others less than half.”
I have only heard numbers that high from alarmists who would go on a witch hunt. Given their numbers in the population I would say its more like 10-20%. (that is way too high and needs to be dealt with & is)
One factoid (unlike your lesbian nuns doing the hiring, one I had not heard) was the dramatic flight from the priesthood in the 60-70’s after Vatican II and all the confusion. The overwhelming number of Priests left to get married. The idea is that the ones who remained during that period were gay. This took the Church off guard and explains the fact that most abuse occurred in that period. By the Early eighties we had a handle on seminary reform & a new generation of young priests started coming on board not infused with the loose morality of the 60’s.
Aw, screw it. I withdraw my stupid question.
Ann: He should be taking full responsibility for what he did wrong... and more.
Agreed, but that is not how the sexual abusers tick. I work with sexual abuse survivors, and have learned about their abusers throught the survivor's stories and reading the professional literature on them. They are slimey, slippery people. They deny, feign, manipulate, and lie. Personal responsibility it not in their makeup. As such, they are dangerous and should be locked up.
As to the Catholic Church and pedophile priests, some diocese became a haven for a cult of pedophiles who nurtured each other and passed around victims. They created a "normalized" sub-culture in which they operated with relative impunity. It was (and perhaps is) a secretive group, and is separate and distinct from the fine men and women of true faith and moral behavior. These pedophile priests molested scores of victims, so it is easy to over estimate their numbers. Part of the problem is that the hierarchy chose to deny and coverup rather than prosecute and remove the cancer. This too makes it easy to overestimate their numbers.
Trey
Father More and Fitz, there's a big difference between a priest who tries to get into the pants of a child (or an adult, which doesn't get much coverage but presents exactly the same problem) and a soccer coach:
The soccer coach doesn't get to claim divine sanction for his pass.
Bocaccio wrote about this in the story Putting the Devil Back in Hell about 600 years ago.
No priest ever made a pass at me -- I think I'm getting a complex about it now; wasn't I cute? -- but all of them denigrated the married state. That was why I quit. I was fond of my parents and got tired of hearing them called second-class spiritual citizens.
The church filed for spiritual bankruptcy a long time ago.
FYI, I’m just as well educated as you, with degrees from universities just as prestigious as the ones where you earned yours. I’m also an ex-Catholic, and believe me, I’ve given lots of serious thought to all these issues.
The fact that you graduated from school, however nice the school, and once called yourself Catholic doesn't indicate that you know what you're talking about. You have to actually make an argument. Asserting over and over that the Church's doctrine is wrong is not an argument.
Edward:
Yes, I will admit that I’m slightly simplifying some of the issues here, but this is a blog thread, for goodness sake. We can’t write entire dissertations here.
It's possible to be concise without distorting your opponent's position.
Father More, you're going to blow your profession's reputation for subtlety with clumsy responses like that.
I didn't say priests HAVE divine authority. I said they CLAIM it and use the claim to reinforce their rapes.
Nice try, though.
Well, if priests have no legitimate claim to divine connections, are you going to stop pretending to do so (personally or institutionally) in your sermons?
You are weaseling around. They cannot have an illegitimate claim when they are committing crimes and legitimate ones when they are not.
Perhaps they don't read Bocaccio in the seminary. Wouldn't surprise me.
You are weaseling around. They cannot have an illegitimate claim when they are committing crimes and legitimate ones when they are not.
It's not weaseling to assert that no one can ever rightfully claim divine sanction for heinous acts like child molestation. Any such claim is obviously an abuse of power.
Catholics believe that priests, through ordination, can perform other sacraments by the grace of God. Obviously you don't believe that, but it's absurd to say that because priests can't claim divine sanction as a cover for child abuse, their ability to administer sacraments is also illegimate.
I will say that any priest that commits child abuse is so far removed from communion with the Church that any sacrament he administered must be questioned also, because a man who does such things can not, by definition, be a priest. But this does not extend to all priests.
All priests are human and all humans are fallible. But there is a difference between a sinner who repents and confesses and receives absolution, and a sinner who uses his position in the Church to find new victims. The fallibility of human priests does not disqualify them from fulfilling the responsibilities of priests (including administering sacraments and delivering sermons), as long as they remain in a state of grace.
I guess you didn't go to Catholic school for 14 years like I did.
Your description of priestly power is not what the church teaches, which is that the power, once endowed, can never be revoked. It's one of those logical imbecilities that the Scholastics were forced to accept because their initial premises were wrong.
Besides you and Father More have it backward. The argument is not that priests have the power unless they abuse it. The argument is that they never have had the power but they falsely claim to have it.
On a mundane level, no self-respecting person could remain in such an organization. Like Groucho Marx saying he wouldn't belong to any club that would have him. Where's your gag reflex?
Harry: apparently your 14 years of education didn't make much of an impression on you. I attended a Catholic school for 6 years as a kid. But more importantly, my husband went through RCIA a few years ago, and now I'm helping catechize my three children. I've learned more about Catholicism in the last 4 years than I had in my entire life before, because it was the first time as an adult that I explored the issues that were most important to me.
The argument is not that priests have the power unless they abuse it. The argument is that they never have had the power but they falsely claim to have it.
The power to do what? No one and nothing gives a priest the power to abuse children or commit any crime. Or are you saying they don't have the power to administer the sacraments? Are you saying that there's no difference between committing a crime and performing a sacrament? That seems to be where you're headed. You've lost me.
Millions of self-respecting, intelligent people are Catholics. It's too bad that your anger or arrogance (or whatever it is) blinds you to that fact.
The power to mediate for the Big Spook, of course and convey messages that are beyond the right of the laity to doubt.
Perhaps Father More will come back and explain to you that the Church was forced to proclaim that priestly rituals are valid even if the priest himself is not in a state of grace, because, otherwise, how would the laity ever know whether, say, the Last Rites has been validly imposed?
If Catholics had any self-respect, they would demand that their bishops turn over rapist-priests to the civil arm for condign punishment (as the Church used so blandly to say during the Inquisitions) and liquidate all their property to make restitution to victims, instead of filing for bankruptcy.
Instead, they run their religion like a grocery store.
So I was right. I used to know the Baltimore Catechism by heart, but it's been decades since I could recite it.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा