http://www.msnbc.com/news/844789.asp?vts=121320020410 It's about damn time. VATICAN CITY, Dec. 13 — Cardinal Bernard Law, under intense fire in a church sex abuse scandal, resigned Friday as Boston archbishop. The Vatican said Pope John Paul II had accepted the resignation after the two men held talks Friday morning. The pope named Bishop Richard Lennon an auxiliary bishop in Boston, to run the diocese temporarily. “I AM PROFOUNDLY grateful to the Holy Father for having accepted my resignation as archbishop of Boston,” Law said in a written statement released by the Vatican. “It is my fervent prayer that this action may help the archdiocese of Boston to experience the healing, reconciliation and unity which are so desperately needed.” “To all those who have suffered from my shortcomings and mistakes, I both apologize and from them beg forgiveness.” Abuse victims, lay members and even some priests had intensified calls for Law to resign after 18 years at the helm of the Boston archdiocese, as more cases of sordid conduct by priests unfolded from the release of Church files. Law had been at the Vatican all week, but largely kept out of the public’s eye. The cardinal slipped quietly away from Boston to begin a round of meetings with top officials at the Vatican over his and his archdiocese’s fate. Law has been accused of having shuffled from parish to parish priests who were accused, often repeatedly, of sexually abusing minors. Recent days have been marked by some of the most shocking revelations in the year-old scandal in Boston, with the release of thousands of pages of the archdiocese’s personnel files. LAW MAY FACE GRAND JURY On Thursday, it appeared that Law could also be facing questions from a grand jury about his supervision of priests accused of sexually abusing minors. Victims have accused Law of being more mindful of his personal reputation that honestly dealing with the scandal, and now dozens of priests under his command are demanding he step down. The Vatican may also decide whether the archdiocese, facing enormous payments in settlements with sex abuse victims, should declare bankruptcy to protect itself from creditors. Whenever a bishop offers to step down, for age, illness or other problems, it is up to the pope to accept the offer or to ask the churchman to stay on, as the pontiff did back in April when Law also journeyed to Rome to seek out John Paul’s guidance. After Law, now 71, returned in the spring from his meeting with the pontiff, he said he was “encouraged” in his efforts to provide “the strongest possible leadership” in ensuring no child is ever abused again by a priest in his archdiocese. But in the eight months that have ensued, the scandal worsened, with some of the most shocking revelations coming in recent days. In recent years, sex abuse scandals have engulfed dioceses across the United States and in Ireland, France and the pope’s native Poland. But Boston has been at the epicenter of the scandals rocking the Church, because of the archdiocese’s centuries-old prestige and Law’s insistence that he stay at the helm. Last month, Law, in an apology delivered during Mass in Boston’s Cathedral, acknowledged his responsibility for decisions that “led to intense suffering.”
Now, if the pope would just resign and they could get one who would allow the priests to be more normal in their sex lives. It would put an end to this if you had married priests with children throughout positions of power in the church. However, the present pope is doing everything he can to prevent that, even after his death, by greatly expanding the college of cardinals by appointing only celibate (allegedly) right wingers.
And then if the new pope would just encourage all of the Catholics in the world to pick up the peace pipe and fill it with some really good skunk.....maybe then we'd all live happy, peaceful lives. baby steps, Glynch, baby steps.
And I suppose that married men, or men not bound by church dogma never commit child abuse? I understand that the huge majority of child abuse is done by family members. This is an issue you really don't want to oversimplify. The tragic thing here (beyond what happened to the kids, of course) was the cover-ups by the church and its refusal to address the situation as soon as it suspected something was amiss. Law and his ilk deserve everything that's coming to them. Bye and good riddance.
bnb, you're right about family members committing abuse. But there is no policy more certain to encourage abuse than to force people to repress their sexuality. It's not just Catholics. Back when I lived in NYC, there was a rash of Hasidic Jews raping Puerto Rican strangers in Queens. We are all human beings with sexual urges. Pretending any of us are above acting on those urges EVER IN OUR ENTIRE LIVES can only lead to bad behavior, carried out necessarily in secret. It is a bad, stupid, dangerous policy. The Catholic Church, and all other religions which demand celibacy, are wrong on this and by standing by this policy they share responsibility for these bad acts.
Oh God, glynch. Now you're inventing a right-wing conspiracy in the Catholic church. Let it go man. Interestingly enough, I support the notion of married priests. I am in the MINORITY of rank and file Catholics worldwide. The Catholic League has conducted polls on this very issue and the results have been lopsided in favor of celibate priests. This is my religion. I have no idea whether or not you are Catholic. If you are not I will have to respectfully ask you to not politic for policy changes in somebody else's religion (unless of course that policy involves terrorism, etc). The only thing that needs to be repaired in the curch is to weed out and punish those who harm children. That should include referral to the appropriate District Attorney.
This is the most ludicrous thing you have ever posted. The only way the church bears any responsibility for this is in the fact that they covered it up. For that the church is responsible and should be made to face the consequences. A change in the rules for priesthood wouldn't entirely fix the problem. If priests were allowed to marry, what about single priests? Isn't it conceivable that some single priests would use their position of trust to take advantage of women sexually at their most emotionally vulnerable times? The bottom line is that people who haven't spent time in the Catholic church or haven't studied it intensely cannot possibly understand the culture surrounding the notion of a celibate clergy.
Batman -- what if they honestly believe that celibacy for priests is commanded by Jesus Christ? you can say they're crazy for it...but does it make them wrong?? does it then make the liable for unintended consequences of living their faith?
Refman, I basically agree and I respect your position here. I also respect your religious beliefs and your Church's right to do what they please if they operate within the law. That said, don't you think the Church would do well to not just punish bad behavior but look at the symptoms of same? With all due respect to the Catholics who favor the current policy (and I don't believe too much respect is due them, frankly), celibacy will work when it is accompanied by castration. Until that time, the current policy is dangerous and dumb.
Max and Ref: I replied before reading your recent posts. First, I don't think the Church is literally liable. But, yes, I do think that the policy is partly responsible. If it were changed, there would certainly still be instances of abuse but they would certainly be lessened. I am sure the Church would never allow practicing homosexuals to serve as priests, but if they would the instances of abuse would be lessened further. To which I pose the question: Which is more offensive, evil or an affront to God? Priests engaging in sexual (maybe even homosexual) behavior, allowed by the Church? Or priests engaging in statutory rape of minors, though condemned by the Church? I'm not Catholic and I don't have a say in this. But I am American and we're allowed to register opinions on bulletin boards. Mine is that celibacy will never work for all priests and that it is a heinous crime waiting to happen. That's all.
Refman and others, are you saying that married men who have children are going to be as laissez faire and lackadaisical about speaking out about child abuse as these guys have been? Don't you have children yourself? I'm sorry, though some married men commit child abuse too, the average married man with children is just more sensitive to the seriousness of child abuse. No conspiracy. It's just people with kids tend to take these issues more seriously. If married people with children were in positions of power in the church this scandal and the continual coverups etc would not have been tolerated for so long.
You seem to imply that rape is about sexuality, when other have suggested its more about power. Perhaps if the priests had hookers (concubines?) there would be no more abuse. (And maybe more interest in the clergy ). I am thoroughly ashamed at the way the Catholic Church has addressed the abuses. There is absolutely nothing in any Christian thinking (catholic or otherwise) that would condone this stuff. I can think of no legitimate reasoning for the blatant denials and cover-ups by the church. For that reason, I have little pity when they are 'held accountable' as an organization. I just feel we are trivializing a very serious matter in suggesting the celibacy policy is a major factor. There have been numerous cases of abuse in group homes, schools of the deaf, hockey camps, and other places where a person is in a position of authority. Family members and close family friends continue to be the highest offenders. As I said, this in no way excuses the priests, and I just can't fathom how the authorities could shuffle the offenders among parishes without any thought to the children. And you would expect that they would be kept to a higher standard than the general public. I just think it is important to keep in perspective the causes of child abuse, and to keep vigilant in educating about signs of abuse and to try to stop it in all areas.
Sadly this is exactly what I'm saying. In too many cases, not only were the fathers involved, but the mothers were aware and did nothing to stop it.
bnb, I agree with you almost entirely. The exception is your virtual denial that there is any correlation whatsoever between the celibacy policy and rape. People have sexual urges and thoughts. When you tell people that those urges and thoughts are evil and must be repressed, and when some of those people are ultimately unable to repress them, bad things can and do happen. Further, the repression of sexual urges and thoughts can and does lead to a twisted sexuality. People who might have otherwise had a normal, healthy sexuality can turn to dark behavior as their only outlet for their sexuality. Of course lifting the ban wouldn't eliminate all cases of abuse. But I can't believe you wouldn't agree it would lessen them. Is there a reason priests aren't neutered? I'm not trying to be coy here, but what's the ultimate goal? Is it just that they remain celibate or does the goal also include that being an issue of free will? In other words, would their celibacy count less if their urges were physically eliminated? I tend to think it would. Which is the problem. Priests are intended to show their allegiance to God by resisting normal human urges. Is it any wonder that some of them are not that strong? Is it worth these instances of rape to keep making them try?
Actually, I'm having second thoughts on that too. In trying to find a link to back up a 90%+ family member stat I read a while ago (I know how you guys love links) one article suggested that the celibacy rule may contribute to loneliness and lack of companionship. This, in turn, could make them more apt to abuse. That made some sense to me. I still contend that the position of power, coupled with denial of abuse are much bigger factors. I also beleive that the cases against the church receive more publicity because they are in some way 'explainable', because of the church's own denials, and as they are often central in large lawsuits (no sense in suing Uncle Jim - you won't find a contintency lawyer willing to take that on).
The problem with all of this analysis is that we are talking about a VERY small % of priests. Most here agree that even were the celibacy policy changed that some abuse would exist. I doubt that the % of priests involved would change significantly. The targets of abuse would change, but in the end analysis, abuse would still exist in a somewhat stable proportion. I have no problem changing the policy, but I am in the vast minority of Catholics. By and large Catholics believe that offenders should be removed from the clerical state and reported to the proper authorities. As to the celibacy/sexual urges debate, I have something to say. When I was a kid there was a very popular priest at my parish. He is no longer a priest. He left the clergy when he learned that he had impregnated a secretary. So yes...some priests break the vow of celibacy...but it doesn't necessarily follow that the sexual activity will be rape of male children. All need to keep in mind that Catholics are well aware of the problems which plague the church. We are embarrassed by what has happened. But because of it we have been under constant attack for the last couple of years. Most of it hasn't been nearly as civil as the debate here on the BBS. Don't be surprised when Catholics react defensively. Please keep that in mind when commenting on somebody's faith.
Refman, I'm not surprised when Catholics react defensively. I understand that. I try to be respectful when discussing religion, so I hope nothing I've posted here has offended you. If anything has, I apologize for that. While most Catholics are good people and while most priests are good people, I believe the leadership continues to fail the rank and file. As Max posted above, the Law resignation was far too long coming. And the Pope has not behaved with appropriate indignation, with regard to Law or the bad priests. I think he needs to do more and I think the leadership needs to do more, to reassure Catholics and others that they are doing everything in their power to keep this kind of stuff from happening. I think a fresh debate on celibacy would be a good move here. As to the %'s, if one rape is avoided, wouldn't it be worth it?
