Tuesday, July 19, 2011

Another sign of the coming conservative moment in the American Catholic Church

Charles Chaput (pronounced "Shapoo"), the conservative Archbishop of Denver since 1997, was appointed Archbishop of Philadelphia by the Vatican, one of the highest positions in the American Catholicism. Chaput is a Potawatami Indian and a member of the Capuchin order.

The move is seen as the latest sign that the Catholic Church in America is moving in a more conservative direction. This is the most significant blow to the liberal Bernadin wing of the American Church bureaucracy since the election of another conservative, Archbishop Anthony Dolan of New York, to head the United States Catholic Conference of Bishops late last year.

Chaput was, of course, polite and gracious to the outgoing Cardinal Rigali, but the child sex abuse scandal also played a factor in the appointment of Chaput, who many say the Vatican saw as a much needed outsider, and who has acted swiftly in such cases in the Denver archdiocese. Conservatives like Chaput are of a less therapeutic mindset than the liberals who thought that such cases could be solved through psychological treatment--an attitude that resulted in many offending priests being put back into positions with exposure to children.

The conservative trend in American Catholicism is the subject of George Wiegel's "The End of the Bernadin Era," in the February edition of First Things magazine.

19 comments:

Anonymous said...

I think its great! Its a sign of the times. Just as the World (especially Europe and America) are becoming more liberal and corrupt the Church is tightening it up and becoming more conservative and be more adamant in its position. It will be nice to see how history for the church unfolds. I heard our current pope talk about how the church may be smaller but more concentrated (faith wise)as the church moves forward into history. I wonder if we will see more schisms in the church due to this. Recently 250 priests from Austria Took a vow of DISOBEDIENCE against the church in an attempt to progress their liberal agenda. Its interesting times for sure.

One Brow said...

... than the liberals who thought that such cases could be solved through psychological treatment--...

What actions did the conservative bishops take back then? Where priests defrockd by conservatives? Are you going to pretend no conservatives were in a position of power?

Singring said...

'Conservatives like Chaput are of a less therapeutic mindset than the liberals who thought that such cases could be solved through psychological treatment--an attitude that resulted in many offending priests being put back into positions with exposure to children.'

Why of course...the liberal priests and bishops are to blame.

Never mind the head of the congregation of the faith - which is by definition one of the most conservative organs of the church - ordered silence on these matters. Never mind that a letter directly from the Vatican to Irish bishops stated that - I quote:

"In particular, the situation of 'mandatory reporting' [of abuse cases to state authorities] gives rise to serious reservations of both a moral and a canonical nature"

http://articles.cnn.com/2011-01-19/world/ireland.church.scandal_1_irish-bishops-abuse-survivors-irish-church?_s=PM:WORLD

So now the Vatican is riddled with 'liberals'?

Also - what 'psychologcial treatment' are you referring to? Can you give any examples in which an accused priest was referred to an accredited therapist or institution by the church? In most cases, these pedophile rapists were being sent from congregation to congregation without any treatment at all. That's one of the main reasons it was so rampant.

Child rape was widespread in the Irish Catholic church - are you going to argue that in a country that banned condoms until the early 90s and in which abortion is still illegal, the church is particularly liberal?

Anonymous said...

Why is it that every time the Catholic Church is brought up in any topic the child abuse scenario is always ALWAYS thrown in. Its horrific that it occurred and any person guilty should suffer consequences and the Church did exactly what modern psychiatry was told to do at the time. Certainly this is no better the the number of coaches, school teachers, protestant clergy and other youth related programs that were told to do the same thing. Modern psychiatry thought it to be a curable mental defect and abusive coaches/teachers were cycled just like clergy were. Statistically the instances of this amongst coaches, teachers is higher. Im not trying to say that it is right because its not but people try to pose it as if its because the clergy are sexually frustrated and they are all out to rape little children. Its simply ridiculous that people are up for having a real conversation on Catholic or moral issues without some how linking the Child abuse cases. Its a pretty desperate attack. In addition, the church in light of the errors made has done a HUGE amount to turn the tide against these instances and has been much more stringent in recent years in the ordination process and more thoroughly selecting priests. Also most of the the cases we are seeing pop up today are mostly by cases that occurred during that period of priestly scandal. The rates are much lower today and fewer priests are being ordained partially due to the ordination process being much more stringent in who becomes a priest. Now of course we have to take into account not all of the the incidents were reported but you also have to take into account how many are falsely accused. Most of the statistics just show the number of accusations and not the number of proven molestations. There was one case in which a priest was sentenced to 60+ years in prison and out of the 3 boys that accused him 1 of the boys repented later on that he had lied and one of the boys was heard afterwards bragging that "I should have won an academy award for the performance" after he had taken the witness stand. Its a sad world we live in and a lot of people just want to make a quick buck with frivolous lawsuits. Hell i think we all heard of the lady that sued Mcdonalds because she spilled the coffee in her lap and won 600k dollars. I hate how ALL clergy are persecuted for the 2-4% of priests during the mid to late 90's that committed these crimes.

Singring said...

Excuses, excuses, excuses.

'...and the Church did exactly what modern psychiatry was told to do at the time.'

Could you perhaps indicate one single case where the church even consulted with a licensed therapist or psychoanalist, let alone gave one of their priests into their care? Could you perhaps elaborate on what psychiatric institutions the church maintained to take care of its pedophile priests? Perhaps you can cite the orders from teh Vatican outlining their program for therapy for offending priests?

'...but people try to pose it as if its because the clergy are sexually frustrated and they are all out to rape little children.'

No, that is not what they're saying. EWhat they are saying is that there was a pervasive cover-up and facilitation of child abuse in the Catholic church, an institution that would like to lecture us on morality any chance it gets.

'Its a pretty desperate attack.'

So everyone from local priests right up to the pope was invovled in this cover-up, but you think its a 'desperate attack'? I wonder what the people who were raped by Father O'Grady, for example, who is still living on church pension, would think of that.

'n addition, the church in light of the errors made has done a HUGE amount to turn the tide against these instances...'

You mean, like withholding documents from legal authorites or not submitting their report on the protection on children's rights to the UN, which is now 13 (!!!) years overdue?

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/07/15/panel-says-vaticans-report-protecting-childrens-rights-years-overdue/

'There was one case in which a priest was sentenced to 60+ years in prison and out of the 3 boys that accused him 1 of the boys repented later on that he had lied and one of the boys was heard afterwards bragging that "I should have won an academy award for the performance" after he had taken the witness stand.'

Could you please cite that particular case, maybe link to an article or report describing it?

'Hell i think we all heard of the lady that sued Mcdonalds because she spilled the coffee in her lap and won 600k dollars.'

Another Christian who likens the rape of children to having hot coffee spilled on your lap at McDonald's. Goodness help us all if this revolting callousness is representative of the morals of Catholics.

And you wonder why people are so incensed with the attitude of the Church and many Catholics to what the Church has done?

Have you no shame at all?

Lee said...

> Have you no shame at all?

Hmmm. To a materialist, shame is nothing more than the state of chemicals and electrical charges in someone's brain. By what criteria should we judge one set of chemicals and electrical charges superior to another?

Singring said...

'Hmmm. To a materialist, shame is nothing more than the state of chemicals and electrical charges in someone's brain. By what criteria should we judge one set of chemicals and electrical charges superior to another?'

Apparently, if Lee didn't believe in a supreme dictator in the sky who tells him what to feel and think, he would see nothing wrong at all with child rape and making excuses for it.

Make of that what you will.

One Brow said...

Its a sad world we live in and a lot of people just want to make a quick buck with frivolous lawsuits. Hell i think we all heard of the lady that sued Mcdonalds because she spilled the coffee in her lap and won 600k dollars.

Before you spew out more pro-business propaganda, I suggest you view the HBO documentary "Hot Coffee" and learn what some of the statkes reallyare/were.

Singring said...

I want to thank you for recommending that documentary, OneBrow. I'm watching it right now - its eye-opening and gut-wrenching, even for someone already opposed to tort reform.

Interestingly, it also touches on judicial elections and how they are influenced by interest groups.

Thomas Aquinas said...

Singring:

Just click my name.

TA

Singring said...

I have read Weigel's piece before.

It is the usual litany of stomach-churning excuses (Others did it too, its all thing of the past,...) that includes such hair-raising and obvious nonsense as this, dutifully cited by Weigel (I can't even find those numbers in the report, but Weigel says they're there):

'On the contrary: Most sexual abuse takes place within families. The John Jay study concludes that, in 2001, whereas five young people in 100,000 may have been abused by a priest, the average rate of abuse throughout the United States was 134 for every 100,000 young people.'

You ought to be able to figure out for yourself why this 'statistic' not only doesn't even support the initial claim, but actually makes no sense in any way shape or form at all.

I'll give you a hint by way of analogy:

'BREAKING: John Jay study finds that bank robbery was not a problem among lacrosse players!

Most banks in the US are robbed by women. The John Jay study concludes that, in 2001, whereas five banks in 100,000 may have been robbed by lacrosse players, the average rate of bank robberies throughout the United States was 134 for every 100,000 banks.'

I'll give you one thing, though: There appears to have been counceling and therapy program for offending priests, so I was completely wrong on that point. However, this just makes the situation worse, because the Church obviously thought that priests needed treatment, but that they should not be reported to officials.

Now let's look at the conclusions of the report:

Factors contributing to the abuse problem, as stated by the report:

Failure by the hierarchy to grasp the seriousness of the problem.

Overemphasis on the need to avoid a scandal.

Use of unqualified treatment centers.

Misguided willingness to forgive.

Insufficient accountability.

(http://www.religioustolerance.org/clergy_sex20.htm)

Thanks for making my point.

Singring said...

Another day, another report detailing the cover-up of child rape in Ireland.

http://www.rte.ie/news/av/2011/0714/media-3002304.html

19 cases between 1996 and 2005 in a small diocese - the Bishop lied to his own congregation about them, but reported them to the Vatican and they did nothing to alert authorites.

Anonymous said...

Just so you know... The Catholic church has been doing quite a lot to make reforms in regards to the abuse scandals. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKQLfYh4AsU&feature=player_embedded

There are many more cases like this and all though there is much need for improvement much has been done to fix a lot of the errors that were once made and to prevent further errors. Unfortunately, there are still cases that emerge from times past but most of the cases are from past Church history during the time when there were more instances of this occurring.

Anonymous said...

In fact, Pope Benedict has done an excellent job in removing delinquent Bishops and many say its one of the bigger highlights of his papacy. Not to mention cleaning up the ordination process and other reform. There is definitely work that needs to be done and much more reform and scum yet to be cleaned up but it does look as if that is what is happening.

Singring said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Singring said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Singring said...

'Just so you know... The Catholic church has been doing quite a lot to make reforms in regards to the abuse scandals. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKQLfYh4AsU&feature=player_embedded'

This is about the very bishop who is at the centre of the Cloyne report.

Its swell that the Pope has finally 'accepted the resignation' for this protector of child rapists, but let's have a look what the Pope himself was actually doing while this was going on in Cloyne.

Singring said...

'In fact, Pope Benedict has done an excellent job in removing delinquent Bishops and many say its one of the bigger highlights of his papacy.'

Among many damning points the Cloyne report contains the following conclusion:

'... the Commission says the Papal Nuncio replied to its request for information by saying he was 'unable to assist you in this matter'.'

Source: http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0713/cloynetracker.html

So the Pope's office refused to cooperate with the investigation and you call that 'an excellent job'? Is that a 'highlight of the papacy'?

I quote some choice sections of the Cloyne report:

'...[the] Commission has judged [complaints] by the standards set in [the Church's] own documents –
the Framework Document and Our Children, Our Church.'

'The
Diocese of Cloyne ostensibly accepted the Framework Document and
promised to implement it. On the contrary, Bishop Magee
appears to have taken little real interest in its implementation for 12 years. He
allowed the authority of the diocese in this regard to be exercised for that
period by others, in particular Monsignor O’Callaghan. Monsignor
O’Callaghan acted in what he perceived to be the best interests of the
Church... [Monsignor O’Callaghan] refused to accept the Framework Document as a proper
ecclesiastical policy.'

'The reaction of the Vatican to the Framework Document was entirely
unhelpful to any bishop who wanted to implement the agreed procedures (see
Chapter 4). The Congregation for the Clergy told the bishops of Ireland that
the document was “not an official document of the Episcopal Conference but
merely a study document”.'

'Those who thought like Monsignor O’Callaghan had their positions
greatly strengthened by the Vatican’s reaction to the Framework Document.'

'The fact that the Papal Nuncio wrote to the bishops expressing the
Congregation for the Clergy’s reservations about the Framework Document
was significant. This gave comfort to those, including Monsignor
O’Callaghan, who fundamentally disagreed with the policies in the document.'

'Bishop Magee, prior to his replacement by an administrator, referred a
number of cases to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. A case
which expressed concerns about Bishop Magee himself was referred to the
Congregation for Bishops by Archbishop Clifford in a timely manner (see
Chapter 26).'

To sum up:

1.) The public outcry from earlier reports on rampant child rape by priests in Ireland forced the Irish Bishops to pass rules that ostensibly were intended to stop this from occuring in the future.

2.) Bishop McGee did not implement these rules and actually appointed someone to oversee this aspect of his diocese who thought these regulations were wrong.

3.) The Vatican - specifically the Papal Nuncio and the office for protection of the doctrine of the faith - did nothing to make sure these regulations were enforced: on the contrary, they supported those who refused to implement them (as recently as 2005!). They also did not pursue allegations of child rape that were reported to the by McGee, nor did they pursue reports about McGee himself

Now you tell me that the McGee resigning somehow illustrates that 'much has been done to fix a lot of the errors'? The Vatican already KNEW what was going on and did nothing to stop it, but now, after it has all blown up in their face (despite their efforts to resist the investigation) in yet another public scandal, they decide to let him 'resign' and you think that is a sign of decisive action on the part of the church? You have got to be kidding me.

Singring said...

P.S.:

Here's the original report:

http://www.justice.ie/en/JELR/Cloyne_Rpt.pdf/Files/Cloyne_Rpt.pdf

Read it - if you have the stomach for it. And remember - this is only one small diocese in Ireland.

One diocese.

Imagine what was going on the world over.