The events at Penn State have properly called for an examination of conscience from the university's Board of Trustees, which, apparently hoping Joe Paterno would resign in light of the revelations emerging in recent days, was forced to fire the college football legend. One can only hope it provokes a similar examination of conscience from Paterno and among his staff for their role in covering up the soul-crushing crimes of Jerry Sandusky--even among the students so blinded by tradition and the institution of Penn State football that they rebelled at this most basic recrimination for the coach’s unforgiveable lack of judgment and sins of omission.
"I am disappointed with the Board of Trustees' decision, but I have to accept it," Paterno said in a statement. I am disappointed that Joe Paterno did not perceive that at the minimum circumstances demanded his resignation. They may in fact require criminal charges.
Of course in the church we are painfully aware of the damage individuals can do when they seek to protect a cherished institution from scandal, sadly from precisely this kind of scandal. Still, I have never ceased to be amazed to hear the stories of people who had their suspicions, if not caught perpetrators outright in the act, and chose to go to superiors instead of to police. This phenomenon is repeated in the Penn State scandal as a young graduate assistant Mike McQueary stumbles upon Jerry Sandusky, a senior staff member, raping a ten-year-old child. Not only does he A.) not intervene in the attack or B.) call the police; he seeks counsel from his father, who apparently failed to provide good counsel, then waits a day before reporting the attack, not to police, but to his superiors.
What exactly is going through the mind of a person under these admittedly unnatural and stressful circumstances? Why have so many failed to do the obvious, right thing on these occasions?
Molesting a child is the kind of offense that envelopes all parties in a cloud of shame; it distorts perspectives, obscures the best path forward. The victim, ashamed to report or describe his victimization; the witnesses, whose experience in life probably have not prepared them to think clearly and act with resolution when confronted by such a despicable act; the perpetrators themselves, whose sickness at least is clear, probably feel a kind of shame themselves when so caught, but it is not a shame that promotes remorse and atonement, but cunning and self-preservation. How many have accepted implausible explanations from child molesters because on some level that was the easiest way out for everyone?
McQueary, the eyewitness in this case, may have been at a complete loss as to how to proceed; he may have been worried about his career at Penn State, probably a little of both. This sorry episode is just another example of why statements of policy and procedure must be established and beaten into the minds of staff at all institutions that touch on the lives of children. That way when someone perceives an act of child molestation—even if they succumb to brain freeze because of what they’ve seen—they can proceed like an automaton through a regimented series of steps that will protect defenseless children from these cruel attacks, as well as the irresolution of others.
Rome's abuse prosecutor demands accountability
10 November 2011
The Vatican's chief prosecutor of clergy sex abuse cases has hinted that the sexual abuse of children by priests will never be stopped until church authorities become more accountable for the way they deal with such abuse cases. "No strategy for the prevention of child abuse will ever work without commitment and accountability," said Mgr Charles Scicluna on 3 November at an international forum held at the Italian Senate. He also said the Church still had a "great deal to learn from psychology, sociology and the forensic sciences".
http://www.thetablet.co.uk/latest-news.php
I'm with Ed (#2) about the fact that whistle blowers are denigrated. We, as a culture, say that we value such actions but in reality we really don't. Unless that changes I am not sure that much will really change as the situation will just manifest itself in different ways.
Maybe Paterno thinks he is a bishop. You know, protect the faithful from scandal. And let's not forget the $70 mm football contribution to Penn State's coffers. That is a POWERFUL incentive to hush things up.
It's not "bashing bishops" but at this catholic site noting the problems of our own institution which the awful situation at Penn St, throws into sharp relief.
I doubt the NCAA wil do much about Penn St. except perhaps make statements.
Big money is at stake and big money rules football.
Power/money often override the needs of the weakest.
The culture of big time sports (exemplified in the growing number of superconference buildups) is deeply powerful with good PR.
I think it's analogusly the case that our church is still very powerful and utilizes Pr for a best face on its own dismal record of dealing with abuse.
-Lord Acton
''The only thing necessary to assure the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.''
-Edmund Burke
''A man may smile yet be a villain.''
-Shakespeare
The pedophile scandal at Penn State is disgusting. The powerless are raped by the powerful who consider themselves above the law. Yet the ''mills of justice grind slowly but they grind exceedingly fine.'' Already the Coach and the President have been fired.
And, that will be just a start Let right be done. Fortunately, civil law will grant some justice however delayed.
As for the church, its' problems are far worse. The clergy portray themselves as moral arbiters. They have shown themselves to be anything but! Who will remove these men who think that they can finesse their evil conduct - pedophilia and obstruction of justice? Slowly civil authority will bring some of them to some little justice. The institution will do little or nothing.
Penn State will reform. It will recover. It will regain its' good name.
Can the same be said for the Catholic Church?
Note also that Penn State has assured its community of donors that none of their money will be used for the legal defense of those facing the court system for their failure to report. Cardinal Law just threw himself a very expensive 80th birthday party at a top restaurant in Rome. Whose money pays for defending all the bishops, cardinals, monsignors and priests who so betrayed the children of the Roman Catholic church? Why the church's ''donors'' - you and everyone else who has put money in the collection basket. The people of God, voiceless and powerless in their own church, paid for Cardinal Law's lavish 80th birthday party too, at a restaurant that few in the pews would ever be able to afford for their own birthday parties.
Thomas Gumbleton has a column in the current National Catholic Reporter online -
''Church's Leadership has Strayed from the Gospel''. How true, how tragic.
Nothing will ever change until bishops and popes are held accountable for the way they aided and abetted the molestation of children.
If we can criticize the negligence of college coaches and administrators, why can't we also criticize Catholic administrators?
Regarding the Trustees' actions-at the news conference where they sacked Joe Paterno, they came across as self-righteous and self-satisfied. The Pennsylvania Attorney General, and an attorney consulting with some of the alleged victims have both raised questions about the propriety of Paterno's firing. Undoubtedly, the trustees were counseled by legal and P-R advisers to take decisive action in the interests of institutional damage control-rather than direct, but considered steps to get to the truth without damaging the reputations of those whose wrongdoing has yet to be proven.
We all can and should grieve over this frightening tragedy, grieve for all those who have, and continue to be hurt. We should demand justice and not tolerate impunity. But, as Christians shouldn't we resist the temptation to place blame, let alone endorse punishment, until all the facts are known and the accused have a chance to defend themselves?
Some lessons to take from this and subsequent commentators' remarks:
1/ The elite (Ed Gleason,(#2), whether secular or religious, will get exposed for their transgressions by the press because their sins are sensational and gather eyeballs and ad dollars, which is good, if painful, for the Church and Penn State. Perhaps at least in part because of the sensational press coverage of the Church sex scandal (totally appropriate given the circumstances), the Penn State board of trustees, as Anne Chapman (11) notes, may well have realized they had no choice but to act aggressively, that any pile swept under the rug would be uncovered, one positive thing that may have arisen from this moral morass indicative of the frenzied sensationalism of our contemporary culture. As John Barbieri (#10) notes, the identified problems in the Church are far larger than those at Penn State or the NCAA; the problems in the public school system are far, far larger than the problems in the Church, and the problems in the family home are yet again far larger than those in the public school system. We can count on the press to shine light on Pope and Paterno, but what about these far greater numbers in our public schools, and our immensely greater numbers in the family? How to get at the root? Would a good start be to follow the lead of Norway on the issue and have religious education from ages 6-13 in our public schools? Or do we wish to keep our heads in the sand and emphasize the kiddie condom instruction/distribution syndrome thoughout our school system, akin to the policeman correcting the intoxicated teenager driving through the school zone at 60 miles an hour with his seat belt unbuckled by insisting he buckle his seat belt?
The early Christian church was highly dependent upon the support of women, who supported the early Fathers condemnation of abortion and infanticide rampant in the Roman world of the time. Those things are returning with a vengeance are the canary in the coal mine. Can Plato and the Man/Boy Love Society be far behind? How many 12-year-old Greek looked forward to being penetrated by some old man?
Ultimately, this is a problem far larger than Penn State or the Church, but rather of a culture that has lost its moral bearings. It is not that far from the frenzied sexual expression and Fritz Perls of the 60's culture to where we now find ourselves.
Their example - the bishops protect pedophile priests. Rome protects the bishops. Rome does nothing about Cardinal Hoyos who praised a bishop for protecting a pedophile priest rapist and has done nothing as far as we know about the Belgian bishop who was molesting his own nephews, except hide him somewhere out of Belgium. Perhaps instead of letting Cardinal Law be in charge of one of the most presitigious cathedrals in Rome, living in a luxury apartment (paid for by you and every other Catholic who puts money in collections), and throwing himself lavish and very expensive birthday parties, the pope should send him to a monatary to repent for the rest of his days. I suppose Maciel received different treatment because he wasn't fully a member of the club - he wasn't a bishop. He obviously stepped on Cardinal Ratzinger's toes big-time but we will also never know what Maciel did to turn Joseph Ratzinger into an enemy - he is the only one to have truly been disciplined by the pope - bishops get a pass.
Do you agree, Walter? Should the Pope start calling for resignations, replace some of the bishops of various dioceses in the US who assisted Law in Boston, knew all about the pedophiles there, and were promoted after Law was whisked out of Boston by Rome to avoid further entanglements with the civil justice system? Once these resignations are received, and bishops replaced with new, and hopefully more honest and moral men, perhaps the pope could act in a way that shows he is truly understanding of his own guilt in these matters, say a mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa (he loves Latin), and also resign?
Perhaps then the leadership of the church might begin to say it is becoming a force for moral good.
p.s. About imposing religious instruction in the schools. I would assume religious instruction in the schools of Norway is Lutheran. In other countries, it is Islam. In others, Catholic (Ireland for example. Although the government is now trying to do something about that given that the leadership of the church in Ireland has shown itself to be capable of terrible evil in protecting pedophiles instead of children). What kind of religious instruction do you want to impose in public schools of the United States? As you may recall, the system of Catholic parochial schools in the United Staes came about in order to avoid the state-defined and imposed religious instruction of American public schools which was Protestant.
One more thing. How does one converse normally with someone, priest or coach or anyone, knowing that they've raped a child? I've never had that experience but it must be very strange.
Regarding religious instruction in public schools here and elsewhere:
Norway handles the issue by teaching the version of Lutheran that their country has traditionally practiced for children ages 6-10. From 11-13, they teach the other major faith systems of the world, including Hindu, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, and also secular humanism. Although there is some dispute of this system, it is the compromise the majority have agreed upon. Sweden, as far as I could determine, teaches Christianity in their public schools. Whatever the approach, they seem to have less crime and violence than most other countries, including us. In Germany, they allow the various school districts to teach the faith system which the district/school votes on. Not sure how often the votes occur. Germany's population is likely more varied than, say, Norway's. I personally like Norway's approach; however, since religious affiliation is plural in the US, perhaps vouchers or something along the lines of Germany's system would work best. And if a school voted to teach secular humanism, or atheism, or nothing, that would be fine with me. In any case, Scandanavia has far less violent crime than the US, and it seems probable to me that almost any moral system provided by a major faith system might well help develop what seems a deficiency of moral sense among so many in our country.
You get no argument from me in the church abuse handling issue: it was and to a considerable extent remains a fiasco. I do think, however, referencing the US, that to talk about Cardinal Law's sorry record and to omit what I consider to be the fine expression of remorse, the publication of the names of many sexual offenders, and the explanation of what steps he has/is taking offered by Cardinal O'Malley in the August 29th issue of America, ignored by you and all other virulent critics excepting the more open-minded Norman Costa, tends to convey an image of polemics rather than a seeking of the whole truth of the situation as it develops over time. Also I confess my first concern, which I evidently share with Fr Martin, is the protection of our innocent children from sexual abuse. The bishops' mishandling is also an important concern to me. Anyone who reads the US Department of Education's own 2005 study of the immense problem of abuse and its mishandling in the public schools (google Shakeshaft to become informed) must confront the prospect that public school employee abuse of our children is a many times greater problem than abuse in the parochial schools, and that while some are prosecuted, many more have been ignored or gone unresolved. It's all there. And we all know that the very powerful NEA is not anxious to further study this issue, as was recommended in the 2005 report. Bottom line: not only are many times more children being abused in the public schools than the parochial, but more Catholic children are being abused there as well.
I googled Shakeshaft, and I find Breitbart with his agenda plus all manner of writing that aims to exonerate the Catholic Church by virtue of its not being the only, or necessarily the worst, offender in failing to protect children. However, the point is not who is better or who is worse, the point is that child abuse of any kind is bad.
I don't know how you can jump to the conclusion that teaching religion in public schools will fix the problem of pedophiles getting access to children. My mother, who was born in the 1920's and who grew up in Germany, told me about a teacher of something outside of school that she had who sat her down in front of him and dropped a few ashes in her lap to see how she would react. She recognized this for what it was even though she was a little girl, and she told her mother about it, and she never went back to that teacher. This had to have been in the 1930's. Pedophiles have been around for ages, in other words, and their behavior cannot be blamed on anything outside of their perverted minds. We don't protect ourselves from them by being more religious.