The atmosphere of the reporting on the scandals, and the reaction to that reporting, has been much in my mind.
So what am I to make of this? Over at the CNN website, there’s a sad news story about the murder of an American priest, Fr. Esteban Woods, in Venezuela. And though the story contains no real information about any possible motive, the very first comment on the article relates it to the molestation cases.
Is that the lesson to be learned here—that any story which even mentions priests or Catholicism must trigger such echoes?
But, then, as of 10:30 this morning, nearly every other comment on the story takes to task that first commenter. Is that how things now are? The public having reached a kind of exhaustion and willingness to be more fair?
I ask these questions sincerely. I just can’t quite put my finger on the pulse of American feeling about Catholicism right now.
April 30th, 2010 | 12:08 pm
Americans feel about Catholicism the same same way that NBA fans felt about Dennis Rodman. Rodman’s on court performance and earnings potential was not hindered by his off court bad boy image. Most Americans are aware of the sexual abuse and cover-up headlines against priests but only a very small percentage of the US population actually reads the stories because to them this is already old news. Hopefully my personal opinion does not offend the abuse victims of deplorable sexual acts by those priests. The Vatican will clean up the mess and remain traditional and strong.
April 30th, 2010 | 1:23 pm
I’d suppose that most people judge Catholicism by those Catholics with whom they are acquainted and most Catholics judge priests by those priests with whom they are acquainted.
For that reason, while we want the Church to take the incidence of abuse seriously and to pursue justice and healing for those so victimized, we are not going to condemn the good of the innocent many for the exploitative acts of the very few.
April 30th, 2010 | 4:02 pm
Jody,
I think this round of stories on sexual abuse should be thought of as an “aftershock” of the major earthquake, which was in 2002. Its Richter magnitude and destructive power in the U.S. is far lower for two reasons: (a) There are essentially no new revelations about misdeeds that happened here. (b) Everyone has already come to terms with (or as they say nowadays, “processed”) the information revealed in 2002.
The reaction of most people is (I would guess),
“Some Catholic priests abused children and it was covered up by bishops? Tell me something I don’t know.”
The damage in Europe may be greater, but my sense is that it will be less than the damage here in 2002, again for two reasons: (a) Europeans, unless they were comatose for a few years, also heard about the revelations that swept the Church here in 2002. (b) The incidence of abuse in Europe seems (from what has been in the press) to have been much less than it was in the U.S.
The only thing that might have had potential to make this an earthquake on the scale of 2002 would have been genuine evidence of complicity on the part of then-Cardinal Ratzinger.
I think that those who are prejudiced against the Church will be confirmed in their prejudice,
while those who are disposed to be fair to the Church will see that there is less here than the New York Times would like them to believe.
We must expect these aftershocks to occur from time to time in the future.
Steve
April 30th, 2010 | 9:27 pm
Steve,
I must disagree with your assessment “that those who are prejudiced against the Church will be confirmed in their prejudice, while those who are disposed to be fair to the Church will see that there is less here than the New York Times would like them to believe.”
Unfortunately, the constant drumbeat comes not only from the NY Times, but also from the AP, CNN, NPR, Washington Post, FOX, L.A. Times, and on and on it goes. Their method of reportage — report inaccurately and then inaccurately report on the initial inaccurate report — deeply poisons the waters for those who could not have cared less about the Church. They are having their minds formed in such a way as to prejudice them against the truth.
Aftershocks will happen, yes. But the secular media’s intention is to magnify those aftershocks in order to bring the house down. Not, of course, that they will succeed, but they will try their damnedest to make it happen.
May 1st, 2010 | 2:08 am
Steve–
After the US and Europe, there is, so to speak, a third shoe yet to drop, and that’s Latin America. We’ll go through all this again in a few years.
I get the sense that it isn’t an earthquake, this time, for Americans, but an acid rain–the constant, staining dribble of a corrosive, leaching energy and hope and trust.
Jody
May 1st, 2010 | 8:59 pm
Fr. Steve Woods was good man, a good priest, and a good friend of mine. I am disgusted that the story of his senseless MURDER is being marred by completely unrelated stories of abuse allegations. Please be mindful of Fr. Steve’s family, friends, and parishoners and keep these two issues separate.
Thank you.
May 3rd, 2010 | 4:21 pm
Was Woods ever associated with the child rape? One has to ask these days. One could easily have respect for the Catholic Church had their leadership removed these rapists from the pulpit. They did not. Instead, they simply recycled these filthy priests by moving them from church to church. At no time ever has this churches hierarchy stood against the perverts within it except when pushed to do so. No doubt, the Catholic Church is nothing more than a haven for perverts/pedophiles. Their parishioners choose not to believe this. Instead they and their leadership choose to point fingers outside of the church and accuse folk like myself of being against the church itself. I am only against these filthy priests who enjoy sex with children as opposed to other adults and their leadership who shield and protect them. Hell fire judgment is long over due here.
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact