The Catholic Church is a Criminal Enterprise
The Holy See’s reaction to both stories has been swift. An unsigned editorial this week in the Vatican newspaper L’Osservatore Romano attacked the New York Times by name, accusing the paper of willfully ignoring the “truth” of Ratzinger/Benedict’s record and of attempting “to instrumentalize, without any foundation in fact, horrible episodes and sorrowful events uncovered in some cases from decades ago.” The media, it continued, showed a “despicable intent of attacking, at whatever cost, Benedict XVI and his closest collaborators.”
Earlier in the week, New York’s archbishop, Timothy Dolan, used his blog to dismiss the New York Times reports and defend the pontiff’s record by arguing that authorities outside the church also are culpable. Stories about sexual abuse by priests were “fair” if “unending,” he wrote. But he condemned the media for portraying child sexual abuse “as a tragedy unique to the church alone. That, of course, is malarkey.”
Anyone who’s interested in losing his lunch should read the above-mentioned blog entry by New York archbishop Timothy Dolan in defense of Pope Benedict; the archbishop’s incredibly pompous and self-pitying rant is some of the most depraved horseshit I’ve ever seen on the internet, which is saying a lot.
One expects professional slimeballs like the public relations department of Goldman Sachs to pull out the “Well, we weren’t the only thieves!” argument when accused of financial malfeasance. But I almost couldn’t believe my eyes as I read through Dolan’s retort and it dawned on me that he was actually going to use the “We weren’t the only child molesters!” excuse. Dolan must have very roomy man-robes, because it seems to me you’d need a set of balls like two moons of Jupiter to say such a thing in public and expect it to fly. But this is exactly what Dolan does; he bases his entire defense of the Church on the idea that others are equally culpable. The relevant section of his piece:
What adds to our anger over the nauseating abuse and the awful misjudgment in reassigning such a dangerous man, though, is the glaring fact that we never see similar headlines that would actually be “news”: How about these, for example?
– “Doctor Asserts He Ignored Abuse Warnings,” since Dr. Huth admits in the article that he, in fact, told the archdiocese the abusing priest could be reassigned under certain restrictions, a prescription today recognized as terribly wrong;
– “Doctor Asserts Public Schools Ignored Abuse Warnings,” since the data of Dr. Carol Shakeshaft concludes that the number of cases of abuse of minors by teachers, coaches, counsellors, and staff in government schools is much, much worse than by priests;
– “Doctor Asserts Judges (or Police, Lawyers, District Attorneys, Therapists, Parole Officers) Ignored Abuse Warnings,” since we now know the sober fact that no one in the healing and law enforcement professions knew back then the depth of the scourge of abuse, or the now-taken-for-granted conclusion that abusers of young people can never safely work closely with them again.
The most revolting part of this response is the last bit about how “no one knew… back then” the depth of the scourge of abuse, or the fact that child molesters cannot be allowed near children ever again once caught. Dolan is trying to get us to focus on the 1962 case, but the truth is that as recently as this last decade, the Church’s doctrinal office elected to proceed with church trials for less than 10% of the 3000 cases of abuse reported to them between the years of 2000 and 2010.
And just a few days after this blog entry of Dolan’s, the Times would come out with another story indicating that the current Pope, then a Cardinal named Joseph Ratzinger, seems to have quashed an effort to bring a serial child abuser named Lawrence Murphy to a church trial. The inaction of Ratzinger’s office resulted in Murphy being allowed to die “in the dignity of the priesthood,” which was his wish as expressed in a letter to then-Cardinal Ratzinger in January 1998.
So while schools, parole officers, judges, lawyers and therapists may have been deficient in their understanding of child abuse back in 1962 (although I’m sorry — it could have been 1562, if someone molested my child and was allowed back in the priesthood, I’d be reaching for an axe), the Catholic church is alone among all of them in continuing to not get it since then. Despite massive public scandal over the course of what now is decades, they continue to deflect and shield child molesters as a matter of institutional routine. The ugliest part of the New York Times story wasn’t even the involvement of Ratzinger in this mess but the fact that three successive archbishops failed to do anything about Murphy, a man who apparently molested upwards of 200 children.
(And not only did he molest these children, but he clearly was not forthcoming about his crimes when examined by experts in sexual abuse . In the notes of one such expert there is a telling notation: “Denies sexual contact with anyone not named in outside complaints, i.e. admits to sexual contact only with those accused of!” The expert included that exclamation point, too.)
So this monster who was known to the highest authorities in the church to be a monster was allowed to die an active priest who was allowed to work with children for 24 years even after he was exposed, until the end of his life. For Dolan then to lay all this off on 1962 mores is disgusting all by itself and totally disingenuous.
But even worse — what does Dolan’s whiny deflecting and excuse-making say about the church as an arbiter of ethical values? These pompous assholes run around in their poofy robes and dresses shaking smoke-filled decanters with important expressions on their faces and pretending to great insight about grace and humility, but here we have the head of the largest Diocese in America teaching his entire congregation that when caught committing a terrible sin, the appropriate response is to blame the media and pull the “All the other kids were doing it, too!” stunt!
I was raised Catholic but stopped going to church at the age of 12. I was a complete idiot at that age with regard to almost every other area of human knowledge, but even I knew back then that the church was a scam. There are good and decent people working as individual priests, but the institution as a whole is a gang of cheap charlatans preying on peoples’ guilt feelings (which of course are cultivated intentionally by the church, which teaches children to be ashamed of their natural sexuality) in order to solicit a lifetime of contributions.
When I see a Catholic priest chanting his ridiculous incantations and waving his holy smoke over someone’s gravesite or at a wedding, the vibe I get is exactly the same as the one I get watching a plumber groan and moan and babble gibberish about all the different things wrong with your kitchen pipes, when in reality all he had to do was replace a washer. It’s the same as picking up your car after an oil change and listening to the mechanic rattle off a list of charges totaling thousands for the nineteen extra things he looked at under your hood, just out of concern for your safety… And when you protest, no, there was nothing wrong with my alternator, I’m not paying for that, he tries to bullshit you — oh, yes there was, trust me, if we hadn’ta fixed that, your car woulda died on the highway within a week.
That’s all the church is. They’re a giant for-profit company using predatory salesmanship to sell what they themselves know is a defective, outmoded, basically unnecessary product. They’ll use any means necessary to keep their market share and if they have to lie and cheat and deflect and point fingers to keep the racket going, they’ll do it, just like any other sleazeball company.
But I think it’s time we started considering that what the church is is even worse than that. It’s possible we should start wondering if the church is also a criminal organization that in this country, anyway, should be broken up using RICO statutes.
One of the few areas where I agreed with George Bush was in the notion that a country providing safe haven to terrorists should itself be treated as a terrorist organization. Morally this isn’t a difficult one to figure out; a country that keeps house for a bin Laden and doesn’t assist other countries in trying to catch him is a rogue state, one that should be booted out of the community of nations.
We don’t permit countries that harbor terrorists to participate in international society, but the Catholic Church — an organization that has been proven over and over again to systematically enable child molesters, right up now to the level of the Pope — is given a free pass. In fact the Church is not only not sanctioned in any serious way, it gets to retain its outrageous tax-exempt status, which makes its systematic child abuse, in this country at least, a government-subsidized activity.
Somewhere underneath all of this there is a root story that has to do with celibacy. The celibate status of its priests is basically the Catholic church’s last market advantage in the Christian religion racket, but human beings are not designed to be celibate and so problems naturally arise among the population of priests forced to live that terrible lifestyle. Just as it refuses to change its insane and criminal stance on birth control and condoms, the church refuses to change its horrifically cruel policy about priestly celibacy. That’s because it quite correctly perceives that should it begin to dispense with the irrational precepts of its belief system, it would lose its appeal as an ancient purveyor of magical-mystery bullshit and become just a bigger, better-financed, and infinitely more depressing version of a Tony Robbins self-help program.
Therefore it must cling to its miserable celibacy in order to keep its sordid business scheme going; and if clinging to its miserable celibacy means having to look the other way while children are serially molested by its sexually stunted and tortured employees, well, so be it.
If you look at it that way, the church’s institutional behavior is far worse than is commonly believed. It’s not just a matter of an intractable bureaucracy responding too slowly or too insensitively to some scattered accidents of fate. This is more like the situation of a car company that continues selling a cheap but faulty brake system because it has calculated that it stands to make more money selling the cars than it does to lose in lawsuits. The only difference is, a car company can fix the brakes if it wants to. What the Catholic church is selling is by definition faulty. It can’t change, or it will be out of business. So even if not changing means kids will be continue to be molested, it doesn’t change.
I think Chris Hitchens said this once, and I agree with him; if I were a person that made that kind of moral choice, I think I’d have to kill myself. But these guys not only don’t kill themselves, they go out in public ranting about how wronged they are and how they’ve been fucked over by the evil New York Times for airing out their dirty laundry. Again, I admire the balls, but seriously, they must know the game is almost up. Sooner or later people are going to catch on, the state is going to make a move, and there’s going to be a hell of a lot of church property going up for auction along with the seized Escalades of DEA-busted drug dealers. Or maybe not in this lifetime — but one can only hope.
Post Your Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment
T/S Members
Log in with your True/Slant account.
Like other “pro-life” organizations, the Catholic church is far more interested in the welfare of unborn children than in actual living, breathing youngsters.
Why worry about the long-term psychological effects of child sexual abuse on youthful parishoners when you can exert institutional power over women?
For the Catholic leadership, the sexual expoitation of children and their willingness to look the other way is certainly a reflection of its overall patriarchy and sexist structure. But in the case of sex abuse, it’s also criminal.
In this case the crime is two dimensional: First there’s the horrific abuse; then there’s the cover-up.
Hell, even a mere cover-up of a mere third-rate burglary was enough to bring down a sitting president.
In the Pope, the priests, and the Catholics, however, we’re looking at two first-rate crimes with few apparent consequences.
Thank you for this Matt. Could NOT agree with you more.
As someone raised in the Lutheran traditions, I have been closely watching the problems the Catholics have brought upon themselves. Why? Because Luther taught back in the early 16th century that the clergy must marry so that they would understand the problems of their parishioners with children. And because celibacy is a sexual perversion, requiring the clergy to be celibate invites some really strange people into the ranks.
Flash forward nearly 500 years and Luther has been proven absolutely correct. Of course, their are sexual scandals with Protestant clergy but the overwhelming majority of them consist of normal stuff like the preacher falling for the organist.
Far from being the normal failings of fallible humans, however, the current problems facing the Catholic church have veered into the realm of the truly sickening. I once lived in a town with a school for the deaf. Deaf children have an astonishingly difficult childhood. They are often sent to boarding school at a very young age. Their disability makes them especially vulnerable because most danger signals come in the form of sound. I would see these kids struggling to cope with their fears and it would break my heart. So when I learned last week that one of the sick fucks in the employ of the Catholic church preyed on deaf children at a boarding school, I became utterly enraged.
So to all those Catholics out there I say, “Stop calling yourselves Christians until you solve the basic problem of your absolutely vile and disgusting clergy. This is a problem that will NOT be solved until you folks stop requiring your clergy be sexual perverts.
Firing Benedict will not be nearly enough. Until the Catholic church abandons their requirement for a “celibate” clergy, they will always be a rogue and outlaw institution and the rest of us must treat them as such.
RE: “…Catholics are more recognized by this abuse than any other denomination or faith. I don’t know if that is because the actual number of abuses are greater in the Catholic church or if that is just how it is reported.”
The actual number, I’d wager, is greater. However, the reason the coverage/recognition is greater with regard to the Catholic Church is less (if at all) because people believe abuse occurs in Catholic parishes more than in all Protestant churches combined. It’s because of the CC’s outrageous, habitual practice of harboring and enabling perverts. I don’t think any of the stories in the news are ever about a hitherto blameless priest being accused. In a Protestant Church, when the youth minister molests one of his charges it is rarely if ever handled in a manner at all resembling the Catholic way. Right up there with celibacy is the completely undemocratic manner in which the Catholic Church is run. Other churches have much more (1) local governance, AND (2) female influence–even in other churches where official leadership is male-only, at least they have wives and daughters!! I agree if the Catholic Church were scrapped it would be good riddance entirely.
In response to another comment. See in context »The Lutheran Church has had similar problems, unfortunately. In Germany, for instance. Celibacy is not the whole problem – but I don’t know what is the whole problem. Maybe kids should go to karate training instead of to Christian churches until they are post-puberty and big enough to defend themselves against wayward clericals.
In response to another comment. See in context »Are you serious? This comment is a bunch of bullshit.
“Yeah, take that Catholics! Lutherans all the way!”
That’s like a Heaven’s Gate member explaining why the Branch Dividians were a bunch of kooks.
Maybe you should take a look at this informative website, which chronicles the not-at-all-deviant behavior of your upstanding Lutheran pastors:
http://www.reformation.com/CSA/lutheranabuse.html
Yeah, just the normal “preacher falls for the organist” type stuff. Gotcha. Nothing going on there. Not like those damn Catholics. They’re the perverts, not the Lutherans.
…Riiiiight.
I seriously can’t believe you used this post to preach about how the Lutherans were morally superior to the Catholics. Amazing.
In response to another comment. See in context »you both miss the point. we dont have time to pick gnat shit from pepper in the alice in wonderland world of cloud being religion.
its not about which religion is more insane. its about how the catholic church allows/encourages/promotes/covers up child rape and torture while having the brass balls to try and moralize to the rest of us which adults we can and cannot fall in love with.
In response to another comment. See in context »I have to ask–what on earth is the “alice in wonderland world of cloud being religion”?
I assume that was meant to mean something.
In response to another comment. See in context »a religion which reminds me of alice in wonderland, centered around a magical cloud being (god)
thats what i meant. in other words, we need to stop being beholden to absolute fucking lunacy.
clearer?
In response to another comment. See in context »Yeah, you’ve seen one of them religionists, and you’ve seen ‘em all. We used to have a nice neighborhood, but then them religionists started movin’ in, and there went the property value. Now, don’t get me wrong–I’ve got no beef against religionists, so long as they stay on their side of the street and I stay on mine. They stay in their section of the theater, drink our of their fountains, and stuff like that, and everything’s just jim-dandy. Just as they don’t mess with MY freedom, MY country, or my outrageous level of coolness, and everything’s cool. I can deal with ‘em if I don’t have to deal with ‘em. Did I mention how liberal I am?
In response to another comment. See in context »Religion is hard wired in humans so discussions about it are totally useless and a waste of digital space.
On the other hand Matt, never mind the Catholics which are obviously an easy target. Yummy, yumm. Write next time about Muslims, but take in account that with only drawing a picture of their prophet you and your family might have to go into hiding for the next 50 years.
In response to another comment. See in context »In what way, shape, or form is this asinine comment-board pissing contest a discussion about religion?
In response to another comment. See in context »I, too, was raised as Lutheran, I have to add the coda, BUT NOT AS A MISSOURI SYNOD LUTHERAN!!!
This opens up a new consideration of Luther’s motivations when he chose to separate from the Roman Catholic Church.
Thanks!
In response to another comment. See in context »I think it’s dangerous to hold up one religious figurehead as an authority over another, particularly when the one you’re quoting has done so much harm himself. Luther called for the expulsion and genocide of Jews in Germany in his published works, but it’s something most Lutherans never learn, or pretend didn’t actually happen. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Jews_and_Their_Lies)
Religious leaders are human, and as such are at least as flawed as the rest of us. The sooner we walk away from the notion of theologians as experts on humanity and allow general societal standards to apply to all religious behavior, the sooner we’ll become truly civilized.
In response to another comment. See in context »Matt, the link to the bishops’ blog entry doesn’t work. Can you try to fix it? I’m going to google it, but I wonder if you embarrassed them into deleting it.
Thanks. Great post, as always.
http://blog.archny.org/?p=581
In response to another comment. See in context »Matt,
I always appreciate your ability to translate an injustice and convert it into understandable strains of power misuse; aiming abuse where it should be directed:
institutions that allow for abuse
1)Goldman Sachs
2)Tea Party & Media Racism,
3)Papacy Neglect and Child Sexual Abuse
The single most cathartic thing your writing does for me is to identify and direct that anger, insight, and appropriate emotion at the entities most responsible…
In terms of those that are healing from abuse in their own lives; there is nothing more powerful than to find voice, direct that voice to the appropriate party, and find a community of support that ensures it does not happen again. Thanks!
The Catholic church has raping and killing innocent people for centuries. it is more then a criminal enterprise it is a sociopath band of historic mass murders, serial thieves and sexual predators. Great article.
[...] post “The Catholic Church is a Criminal Enterprise” (hat tip Ed Harrison) is [...]
While I largely agree with the majority of your article, there is one point I take some exception to and that is on celibacy. You seem to assume that celibacy is somehow the cause of the abuse and that if priests weren’t required to be celibate, that the problem would largely be mitigated. I disagree. I think the vast majority of priestly pedophiles would be such whether celibacy was required or not. Celibacy does not itself cause pedophilia and ending it will not cure it. These despicable humans would do what they do regardless. The priesthood is merely a convenient cover and hunting ground. Many pedophiles outside the church are married and are free to marry. That hasn’t ended or slowed the problem, in general, at all. Sexual predators of all kinds look for victims where they are easily found and often use positions of authority to facilitate their perversion. Being a priest is ideal for them. I’d wager a large sum that taking celibacy out of the equation would a negligible impact on future incidents.
I agree. Molesters are very likely to be married men. Celibacy just makes being a priest not much of a sacrifice for someone who never expected to have sexual relationships that fit societal norms.
In response to another comment. See in context »i think the point is that celebacy provides cover for those who want to rape children. they can pretend, under the veneer of respectability- piety even (“im better than you because i can abstain!”)
thats why celebacy makes things worse.
In response to another comment. See in context »Celibacy may make things worse, but I believe not to any appreciable degree.
In response to another comment. See in context »it isnt the celebacy itself. its the cloak that it provides. celebacy is rarely if ever successfully self-enforced. typically when people pretend to be celebate they are hiding somtehing socially unacceptable.
by pretending otherwise, we continue to provide cover to degenerates.
In response to another comment. See in context »I agree with you tremoluxman. I too think the dynamic at play is power more than sexual repression, which really only strengthens Matt’s larger point.
In response to another comment. See in context »Exactly so. Exactly so.
In response to another comment. See in context »I too was in the Catholic church and I agree wholeheartedly with your article. I think there are some things people just do not know and go about it backwards.
If you start at the core you will get somewhere…if you start with the crisis and try to work backwards to the core of the problem you will be strangled in red tape almost immediately. That is why these cases never have a true resolution. A settlement maybe – never a resolution.
I (possibly we) have an insider understanding about doctrine and rituals of not only the Catholic church policy but the diocese polices. Most people who write articles about abuses write just the general: who, what, when, where. There is SO much more non-Catholics who read these articles do not know and I have never read ANY articles addressing other facts – which by the way are quite interesting.
It is true Catholics are not the only molesters and abusers. But Catholics are more recognized by this abuse than any other denomination or faith. I don’t know if that is because the actual number of abuses are greater in the Catholic church or if that is just how it is reported.
If you are molested (or any other type of abuse) particularly in Christian faith and you bring a lawsuit, you sue the one church at fault and the individual(s) with that church. Churches as everyone knows or has heard of are usually lacking money. If you win your case, in a non-Catholic church, you will likely get nothing or a pittance in compensation ( for counseling or what ever) because they just don’t have it. It is an individual church.
The Catholic church however,if you are abused with in that church and file a lawsuit is not just one church being sued it is part of a diocese ( a collection of churches with in a region). So there is MUCH more money there. And yes, that also goes back to the Vatican and most people know the vast accumulation of wealth the Vatican has. So if you sue the Catholic church you are guaranteed – if you are successful in your lawsuit – to get more money.
This is just a factual statement. People granted large mounts of money from a lawsuit from a large organization makes a news story. The reason behind the judgment can make the news story expound like yeast in warm water. The more appalling and unjust the news story is the more people will read it. Again, just a fact.
For those of us who went to a parochial school The school actually states (at least mine did so I can only speak for myself) when you sign up for school – Renewed signing YEAR TO YEAR – that *if* you believed yourself to be abused you FIRST have to go to the principal of the school or priest – and then the bishop with become involved and review the case etc. You are asked NOT to involve the police, you are asked to follow protocol.
I know there will be questions like, “What if the priest did the abusing etc.”. Again, this is just a fact. I have no answers to that.
Also a fact told to our class, by our priest, almost as a joke to us children (I will paraphrase because this was told to me so long ago I lack the exact verbiage}… but as a little girl it stuck in my memory. “If priests ever do something wrong do you know where they go?” No one nodded we all sat quiet. “The Vatican” The priest smiled so we all mirrored his emotion back him. He added, “So if you ever go to visit the Vatican and see a priest there he is probably there because he did something wrong”.
I think this was told to us and meant as part of a lesson to help us see that even priests and others are all human and sinners regardless of station in life.
I had always thought those who served in/at the Vatican were of extra special status and chosen to their exalted distinction as some sort of reward.
At that moment ( I was 8 years old) I couldn’t believe the priests were at the Vatican because they were ‘failures’. As an adult I know they are obviously not ALL there for their failings – but which ones are and which ones are not? How many? And why would you want to be commissioned to a the Vatican – on purpose – a place where the possible reason for you being there could be because you were a failure due to something you had done wrong elsewhere?
I was also told by the SAME PRIEST That the Mother Superior never drove herself around in a car – she had a driver. Do you know why? She was the Trustee of all the assets/equity that the school/church had. So if she was in a car accident the other party involved could sue the driver but NOT the church or the nun as the passenger and therefore not get money from the church. Again, I was 8 years old when I head these stories ( and I have MANY more) – these policies may have changed since.
There are many interesting things people fail to mention or report on at the core that are loop holes if you will, that help the Catholic church avoid; Fault,Admission of guilt, Responsibility and so on.
I think it repeating:
If you start at the core you will get somewhere…if you start with the crisis and try to work backwards to the core of the problem you will be strangled in red tape almost immediately. That is why these cases never have a true resolution. A settlement maybe – never a resolution.
Be careful what you wish for. For all of the heinous things that have been done by Catholic clergy, there are good things that are also done. To throw every nun and priest under the bus for the crimes of the few is unfair. Given your view, all Western (Europe, US…) citizens are fair game for terrorists. Perhaps they are.
I don’t understand your comment that all Western citizens are fair game for terrorists.
I’m not saying all individual priests and nuns should be jailed. I’m just saying their employer needs to be disbanded and they need to get real jobs.
In response to another comment. See in context »Perhaps they can apply for daycare jobs, school counselors, or republican congressmen.
In response to another comment. See in context »Or Democratic Presidents cheerfully carrying on Bush-era policies.
In response to another comment. See in context »we nearly lost our collective mind over a pantaloon bomber who might have taken out a plane.
you talk about terrorism.
imagine if al queda siezed a single classroom and raped/tortured 30 childen.
now imagine another organization which presided over the rape/torture of TWO HUNDRED CHILDREN in one obscure school for the deaf in wisconsin of all places.
who even knew there WERE 200 deaf children in wisconsin?
people would riot in the streets after the relatively small alqueda scenario mentioned above.
yes a miniscule number of active child rapist/torturers ever even have to face a courtroom, let alone get convicted.
we turn this country into a practical nursery where doodie peepee words dare not be spoken as to not offend the little ones, yet we let those who rape and torture the little ones go free?
every living proven molestor should be immeditaly brought to justice. every enabler. every supervisor.
and yes, the people who continue to fund this mass-rape/torture cult should ALSO be held accountable for inflicting this sexual holocaust on our nation.
In response to another comment. See in context »Better watch out, Matt. All Sinead O’Connor dd was tear a picture of the Pope in half on SNL and her career was never the same afteward. The Catholic church doesn’t take criticism lightly, especially the kind of criticism in your post.
If you want to read something else that’s really sick, read this aricle.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36062927/ns/world_news-europe/
It’s about a German priest who molested boys. You won’t believe what this slimeball says. The headline implies that he’s admitting to the crimes, but he ends up basically claiming that he is a misunderstood victim.
Catholics like to claim that the offenders are a very small percentage of the total priesthood. That being the case, why does the church seem to be having such a difficult time feeding these pervs to the lions? It’s hard to take seriously any religon that works this hard to protect deviants that molest the children in their congregations.
Thanks for the link, doc, although it makes for revolting reading.
Of COURSE for the offending priest, it’s all about HIS reputation, HIS suffering, HIS future.
He even goes so far as to rationalize his behavior by suggesting, incredibly, that at least for one of his victims, the abuse wasn’t so bad.
These cases, along with similar incidents such as those involving the Boy Scouts of America, should serve as a cautionary tale to parents: You need to know where and with whom your kids are at all times.
You need to be vigilant about not placing your child in situations where abuse is possible, even if that sometimes means your vigilance borders on paranoia.
Remember: Most abusers are relatives, close family friends, clergy, coaches, or teachers. Be skeptical of adults who seem to devote their lives to other people’s children.
As a substitute teacher in Missouri, I’m required to undergo annual training to spot potential abusers. A big part of the offender’s approach involves “grooming” a child by taking special interest in and spending extra time with him or her.
You need to be wary of people who are overly generous toward your child. Gifts are for special occasions; beyond that their occurrence should raise red flags.
But most importantly you need to discuss sex and sex abuse with your kids (in an age-appropriate manner), and always, always, always let them know that they can talk to you about ANYTHING, that if abuse occurs it’s NOT their fault, and that you love them NO MATTER WHAT.
In response to another comment. See in context »Hehe. Matt already wrote an article called ‘The 50 Funniest Things about the Death of the Pope’ (after the last one died) when he was with the New York Press. And he’s still writing…
In response to another comment. See in context »Matt, I respect your point of view. However, as Bishop Desmond Tutu would explain, you need to consider not just the condemnation of the Catholic church, but the healing that needs to happen.
Were we to condemn the church, and to convict most of the preisthood, that would not end the nightmare for many of the people who suffered. When things operate at this scale, we can’t simply throw everyone in jail. We need reconciliation. We need to understand why.
This is indeed a dark age for the Catholic Church. It may not recover. But if we lay waste to it, there will be wounds that will never heal. Let’s learn from this.
Why does it need to heal? Just do away with this church. The many people in the church who are good people and are not guilty can find normal lives in real jobs. In a thousand years, once mankind has outgrown this religion thing, there won’t be any churches. Why not get a head start now? Why save this organization?
In response to another comment. See in context »Why save the organization? Because the organization is a political/lobby organization far more than a religious institution concerned with helping people. Some examples:
(1) The Vatican investigation of US nuns because they apparently refuse to have all aspects of their lives (living arrangements, etc) be dictated by the Vatican.
(2) There was a story a while ago about how the Vatican knowingly lobbied on behalf of Saddam Hussein to keep the oil-for-food program going, despite credible reports that Hussein was starving his own people. The Vatican accepted Hussein’s payment of thousands of barrels of oil, and successfully lobbied US and European nations to keep the program going.
(3) The Vatican policy toward Africa and the whole “people shouldn’t wear condoms” mantra.
In response to another comment. See in context »I’m sorry, but your comments read more like reasons to get rid of the organization.
In response to another comment. See in context »My point was to answer Matt’s question on why some people are fighting to save the organization. I never meant to imply that it should be saved.
I’m saying that it’s a political/lobby group, (somewhat like AIPAC, except for the fact that AIPAC aren’t criminals) that delivers a large voting block. Politicians aren’t going to be rescinding the tax-free status of churches.
Law enforcement can’t really do anything meaningful about it because the Vatican is technically a sovereign nation.
The only group that can do damage to the Catholic Church is the media by according less press/importance to what the Pope says. For instance, ignore when the Vatican does press releases on what the Pope thinks are the biggest problems/sins of the world.
In response to another comment. See in context »Matt,
No doubt the Catholic church needs a major overhaul to survive. Any conversation with another ex-Catholic like me will always acknowledge that priests should be allowed to marry, be vetted more, and children shouldn’t be put in these vulnerable situations. However, I think your comment, “Just do away with church” is a bit harsh. I grew up Catholic with 12 years of Catholic education from grade school to a Jesuit high school. In all that time the emphasis was do good onto others, a realistic and historical probing of the Bible, and an acceptance of modern scientific thought including the teaching of evolution. There was an acceptance of other religions and even atheists. I am not that religious now (more of a deist). The idea of “worship” has always turned me off, but always thought Catholism was a better alternative to fundamentalism. I have had many relatives in the church. My aunt who is a nun who dedicated her entire adult life to serving minorities and poor people. Spending time with her on the Indian reservation, her approach was always a pragmatic one of human service, teaching their own culture, language, and history, and a commitment to their education. Selling religion seemed almost secondary.
I think there are good people in the Catholic church and some good having the Catholic church around.
In response to another comment. See in context »Matt
The same thing can be said for pretty much all governments — they are all vastly more corrupt and cause vastly more harm then any church. Do you expect to dismantle and see the end of governments? So let’s get real and deal in reality — demagoguery whether in support of the Catholic church or in condemning it and or religion doesn’t gain converts to your views, quite the opposite — you look irrational and out of touch with reality.
Mankind will never “outgrow religion” because religion is the *only* thing which gives humanity hope for life after death aka relief from existential angst. Without religion or at the least religious belief, nihilism is the only alternative for most people. Therefore religion will always be a source of existential succor for humanity. Regardless of the many unethical or immoral manifestations of religion, believing that mankind will ever grow above needing existential relief from nihilism is like believing mankind will grow above wanting to be happy.
Let’s try and deal with the reality rather than with letting knee-jerk emotions guide us to delusional ignorant ranting. First off, the Catholic church (I am not a Christian btw) is not a criminal organization just because a number of it’s leadership are criminals. It’s like the wingnuts claiming liberals are communists. Demagogic hyperbole only serves to gain the admiration of like minded people and does nothing to help solve the actual problems. In fact it has the opposite effect — it makes those on the other side steelier in their resolve to resist change to prove that they are not the ‘great Satan’ they are being portrayed as, and it makes people on the fence more likely to side with the group who is being perceived as being unfairly treated.
Is it really unusual for an organization which is dependent on their public reputation to resist at all costs a very public loss of face? Of course not. So before we get on our high horses and act as if what the Catholic church has done in response to their problem, let’s try to realize that what they have done is no different than what most other people or organizations have done or would do — they try to minimize the damage to their reputation. That should be expected, rather than seen as some great surprise. Look at what police departments get away with, or governments or businesses, and how they deal with public excoriation. We aren’t surprised by them, we expect it. And just like we don’t call for the elimination of them because we don’t want to look naive, so it should be when dealing with the largest religious organization in the world. Otherwise we are no better than dogs barking at the moon. We need to promote realistic real world solutions, otherwise we are not taken seriously and our efforts are a waste of time and effort.
In order to help the present situation it’s going to take sober minded realistic critique devoid of condescending rhetoric which insults and demeans the dearly held beliefs which gives deeply felt existential relief to hundreds of millions of people. Telling them they are all brainwashed idiots leaves you and your opinions wasted on them — n’est-ce pas?
How about we demand that the Catholic church changes their policy of keeping criminal acts in-house, if they want to keep their tax-exempt status? Sound reasonable and workable to you?
To demand that religion not be tax-exempt is a bad idea. People donate money to churches because they get a tax write-off. Churches do more public service, e.g. food aid, housing aid, drug and alcohol rehab, helping immigrants, aiding third-world countries, etc., than any other type of organization. They can afford to do that because the big donors (corporations, businesses, wealthy people, foundations) can write it off. Of course there is going to be greed and exploitation by various people in churches because people are people, but is it better to see the end of the public service they provide to the needy in the name of indignation?
So before we grab our torches and pitchforks and try to blame and therefore eradicate religion (how did that work in China and the Soviet Bloc?) let’s try to use some common sense and realize that it isn’t a philosophy which tries to give relief to existential angst which is the problem — the problem is something purely mundane — giving too much leeway to organizations to police themselves. It’s the same basic problem which is a root cause of most of the worlds current problems; too little competent oversight to governments, corporations, etc.
In response to another comment. See in context »As much as I hate religion, I seriously doubt mankind will outgrow it in a thousand years or ever. Various types of religions have always existed; what evidence is there to suggest religion is going away? Even if the Catholic Church were to die off as a result of this ongoing pedophilia scandal, wouldn’t it just be replaced by some other sort of nonsense?
In response to another comment. See in context »Hm. Well, maybe if you hate it just a teensy-weensy bit harder, it will actually go away. Don’t know until you try.
Good luck.
In response to another comment. See in context »I’m the grandson of Lutheran Minister from the German city of Dresden, and in response to some of the commentators here, I can attest that Protestants aren’t saints either. But even with that, in terms of sheer scale and magnitude, any comparison between the Catholics and other christian orders simply pales.
About churches in general, noted Atheist, Marshall Brain, of ‘Why Won’t God Heal Amputees?’ has an interesting take that I’m going to cite at length:
“What about Churches?”
“This brings up an interesting point. Having recognized that God is imaginary, what happens to churches? I don’t think anything “happens” to them. They continue to exist because they perform a useful function.
What is a church? It is a community of people who agree to get together regularly, help one another and share in each other’s company. A church also helps people to focus on the general concept of goodness once a week — that is generally what the sermon tries to accomplish. In addition, many churches have an outreach component. When there is a disaster, either in the community or somewhere else in the world, the church members often will band together to help in some way. The church might collect and send money or relief supplies. Large, advanced churches may even mount their own disaster teams. We saw quite a bit of this type of activity in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans, both by churches and by secular groups.
Once you remove the imaginary being — who, remember, was never there to begin with — along with the book written by primitive men that advocates murder and hatred — do churches suddenly vanish? I don’t think that is necessarily the case. In fact, it probably makes things better. Removing delusion is a good thing, not a bad thing.
A thriving church community can be an amazing thing. But it is the people who make that happen, not any imaginary being. Once the imaginary being is gone, churches continue to exist as communities of people who enjoy each others’ company, who help one another in times of need, and who focus on goodness and good deeds for the benefit of society as a whole. What’s not to like about that? By removing the imaginary being, church attendance may actually go up, because a strong church has a lot to offer.”
That said, a strong case can be made that the Catholics have completely used up all their good-will/benefit of the doubt credits.
Brain’s written a whole book on the subject of Atheism, it can be found here: http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/ and it is one of the more even-handed and plainly written books on the subject. Given all the heat that this has gotten around it I recommend it as being as a good starting place for getting away from the land of crazy and letting cooler heads prevail.
In response to another comment. See in context »In a thousand years, hopefully.
In response to another comment. See in context »Zeus is waiting for a comeback.
I fear many people will always want a simple system that explains the inexplicable. Until science figures them out, one by one.
i was just about to say that “heal” is the favorite buzzword for the apologists.
i for one, as a victim, do not give a tinker’s damn about healing for the CHURCH.
healing for victims means seeing these monsters frog-marched off to prison. seeing this church exposed for what it really is.
other churches are bad too? great we will get to them next. but the catholic church has exhausted any and all good will.
period end of story.
In response to another comment. See in context »Sic ‘em, tiger!
In response to another comment. See in context »Nice try, evyb. Trinity church, which is episcopal, is one of the largest landowners in NYC, and the Jehovah’s Witnesses are one of the largest landowners in Brooklyn. Both are very wealthy, yet neither has had the same problems with lawsuits. That’s probably because these churches haven’t protected child molesters in the same way the Catholic Church has. Also, making public that one has been molested is still a very difficult act for most–suggesting that they’re all doing it for money is low.
Certainly one of the problems with church celibacy is that it attracts a lot of closeted men. I’ve heard it suggested that one of the reasons child molesters have been protected by the church is that its homosexual hierarchy feared exposure. And perhaps, twisted and repressed as they are, the church’s homosexual leaders identified with molesters as sexual perverts.
I like the idea of prosecution of these priests on RICO charges. Many of the actual molesters are beyond prosecution because of statutes of limitation–another problem that needs to be addressed. But the coverup continues and should be prosecuted.
I kiss-eth Matt’s feet. =0
I agree with everything in this article but have to disagree with the inference that celibacy causes pedophilia. Religious institutions attract these pedophiles in the hopes they will be cured from their despicable ways. Unfortunately, the veil of religiosity provides a perfect cover and access to families who are all to trusting. I hope these sexual predators and their protectors are held responsible, to the fullest extent of the law. These children who have been victimized will never be the same again. I know first hand. A priest who my family trusted and couldn’t praise enough molested boys in my class. Years later he was found out and instead of being put behind bars, he was given a cushy job as a financial adviser and provided with free housing at a plush facility for ex priests in Jersey City.
My grandmother wished he got cancer in his balls. I hardly faulted her for saying such a thing.
/Gee, Matt. Are public schools a criminal enterprise? http://www.deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,695220529,00.html
There is a basic logical fallacy to monotheism which goes to the core of the problems all three strands have in adapting to the modern world.
Pope John Paul ll described God as the all-knowing absolute, but the universal state of the absolute is basis, not apex. A spiritual absolute would be the essence of being and elemental consciousness from which life rises, not a moral and intellectual ideal from which it fell. Good and bad are not a metaphysical duel between the forces of light and darkness, but the basic biological binary code. Amoebae are attracted to the beneficial and repelled by the detrimental. What is good for the fox is bad for the chicken, yet there is no clear line where the chicken ends and the fox begins. Life is a constant process of creation and consumption, bootstrapping itself up out of the muck.
Meaning is what’s left when all that is meaningless is distilled away, but we all view the results from different perspectives. When society does prescribe moral absolutes, the result is often contradictory, since the linear presumption is that if a little is good, than a lot must be much better and if anything is at all bad, than it must be all bad. There is no conceptual regard for reciprocity, reaction, balance, laws of unintended consequences, silver linings, etc. Ambiguity is derided and people are expected to line up with the good and against the bad. The result is endless chaos as masses of people are herded around complex situations by simple minded assertions of good and bad. The irony is that relativism provides a much more comprehensive moral code, since one’s actions are weighed against the rest of the universe, as opposed to whatever definition of God you happen to abide by. Karma means that for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. What goes around, comes around.
Between black and white are all the colors of the spectrum, not just shades of grey.
We may all be branches of the same tree, but the result is that we all point in different directions, so viewing one’s cultural idiosyncrasies as anything more or less than what purpose they serve is delusional.
Remember it was the polytheists who invented democracy, since multiple gods(memes) required a need for conciliation and cooperation. Whereas monotheism mostly validated monarchy and other forms of top down rule, because it began as an idealization of social hierarchy and the wisdom of elders, but it overlooks the more fundamental process by which society regenerates this order, as each generation dies off and is replaced by the next. The top down order is periodically replaced by bottom up processes. Those higher up the evolutionary and social ladder are emergent layers of evolution that depend on those below them, far more than those below depend on those above. In fact, in nature, emergent levels tend to be predatory for the purpose of controlling the growth of those they depend on, just as emergent layers of society control those from which they rise. If they succeed in destroying the health of those below them, then these higher levels are no longer necessary.
The Catholic Church as been a farce since Constantine converted in A.D. 400 for political, not religious reasons. Since then, the women have been cut out of any participation, except for subjugation, while the men, including Popes, went on to wage war, have adulterous liaisons with both men and women and acquire vast amounts of wealth. Remember the Borgias, whose family came to epitomize the ruthless Machiavellian politics and sexual corruption alleged to be characteristic of the Renaissance Papacy?
Don’t forget that the reason that priests do not marry is not because Jesus was celibate (which is a joke) but because the church wanted the priests’ property and if they couldn’t marry, the property would go to the church when the priests died.
The whole image of the Catholic Church being a leader of good works for the poor and mis-fortunate is a front business for the corporation of power and corruption they really are.
you make the most sense to me, anyway†
In response to another comment. See in context »love your analysis as to not being married.
greed is pretty much at the root of all evil.
Thank you – priests were allowed to marry until the church got greedy (greedier). Up until the 8th Century, most of the priests were married. Pope Pelagius I made new priests agree offspring could not inherit Church property. Pope Gregory then declared all sons of priests illegitimate (only sons since lowly daughters could inherit anyway in society).
It wasn’t until 1022, when Pope Benedict VIII banned marriages completely. It was all for money and property.
In response to another comment. See in context »[...] As usual, Matt Taibbi has some interesting things to say about the Catholic Church. Regarding the sex abuse scandal, would your opinion change if a different institution was [...]
Guess a lotta priests got click-dicks when it comes to kids. Why? They got no fuckin’ outlet but Goody God. And he ain’t fuckable. And why don’t they marry? An ecumenical council in 412 or thereabouts… Like it was not an original mandate of the Church. It probably grew out of the monastic movement in the Middle East at that time (a guess) where they probably lived lives out of Kazantzakis…with his descriptions of searing oneself for God on aesthetic reasons. Especially if he has a kid on his lap.
But on another note on not searing: I’ve sat with a French priest (Jesuit) after dinner with cigars and wine and debated religion while his housekeeper cum mistress cleared things up. It seems to be more common in France that priests cohabit with their “housekeepers” (a version of don’t ask, don’t tell). That being said, maybe France is just better at covering up the pedophile stuff. I don’t know. But I also don’t see myself sitting down here with a priest at all.
Ah, fucking asshole fingers…the last line of the first paragraph of my first missuve should be at the end of the second. A fucking mistake…
Ah, fucking asshole fingers…the last line of the first paragraph of my first missive should be at the end of the second. A fucking mistake…
Plus another thing to add that maybe trite but somehow universal: There was a convent in New Brunswick next to the elevated RR tracks right across from the Rutgers Chapel. It closed in the 70’s. When it did, they found the bones of a baby in the wall. God’s work….
That sad thing is that Matt’s article doesn’t even venture into exploring the damage done to the individual (and I get that was not the context of his essay). I remember meeting and working with a teen who had been abused by a priest in Boston growing up and the devestation to his live was horrorific and absolute. It’s not too far fetched to conclude that each child molested often equates to a life full of potential completely devestated.
Kirby Dick’s movie, Twist of Faith, covers that angle wonderfully. His particular subject had to deal with more than just child abuse, sexual abuse, and losing his school and church . . . his mother couldn’t handle it. She kept crying “Don’t make me choose between you and my church.” And the poor man (grown at the time of the filming) actually tried not to be upset that his mother kept tithing, financially contributing to the legal defense of his abusers!
So, in a very real way, the Catholic Church tried to steal his mother as well as his childhood, his faith, his sexuality, his marriage and his mental health.
I’m with Matt that the institution continues to behave like organized crime syndicate.
In response to another comment. See in context »Hi Matt,
Did you see that Hitchens was on Real Time recently? He was wondering whether the pope should be allowed to walk around freely without being arrested. It got me thinking that the rape and torture of thousands of children worldwide by many members of the catholic priesthood, and the systematic cover-up by the entire catholic priesthood, including the pope, meets the definition a crime against humanity.
Read the definition and tell me if you think it fits, given that the pope is both head of the catholic church and a head of state for the Vatican.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_against_humanity
Crimes Against Humanity “are particularly odious offences in that they constitute a serious attack on human dignity or grave humiliation or a degradation of one or more human beings. They are not isolated or sporadic events, but are part either of a government policy (although the perpetrators need not identify themselves with this policy) or of a wide practice of atrocities tolerated or condoned by a government or a de facto authority. Murder; extermination; torture; rape and political, racial, or religious persecution and other inhumane acts reach the threshold of crimes against humanity only if they are part of a widespread or systematic practice.
It seems to me that the pope, the pedophile priests, and all those complicit in the cover-up of these crimes must be tried in the International Criminal Court for crimes against humanity if there is to be any justice for the victims and any hope of ending these abuses.
The truly sad part of this is the fact that this problem has existed and currently exists in many other organizations that are supposedly helping underprivileged and fatherless young boys. Pedophiles are the worst of the worst, and cannot be cured or covered up. The Catholic Church will hopefully begin to realize this and correct it; or finally suffer the consequences from their God.
It’s kind of dicey, tying celibacy and pedophilia together. Where you are RIGHT is that the demands of and — most importantly, the TRAINING FOR — celibacy creates psychosexually stunted human beings, many of whom are permanently fixated at the 15-year-old level of sexual development. That accounts for some sexually abusive behaviors, but not all.
The problem is in the nature of religious institutions in general and a hierarchical institution like the Catholic Church in particular. Pedophiles are notorious for seeking out opportunities to be with children as Sunday School teachers, youth group leaders or pastors, Boy Scout troop leaders–anywhere they can have free access to children and enjoy the trust of children’s parents. And remember, a good many, if not most, children who are abused are abused by family members or friends of the family.
What is uniquely Catholic is the organizational cover-up. The Church has clearly made a decision that the success of the organization and the reputation of its leaders is more important than the health, safety, and sanity of young children. This is the obscenity. This is child abuse. I cannot help but think that if we were talking about a School Superintendent who had done as much covering up as the archbishops and the pope has, we’d be calling for his head on a stick. Certainly, the legal authorities would have rushed in to take the scumbag off to jail. But this particular scumbag sits on a golden throne and gets his ass kissed by literally billions of people.
And let’s not forget we’re not just talking about sexual abuse when we number the sins of the Catholic Church. Let’s talk about the “laundries” in Ireland, where kids were simply taken away from their parents for being naughty and put into a life of slavery, where they were regularly beaten and abused. Let’s talk about the fact that the Pope has said that African Catholics should not use rubbers, thereby condemning untold thousands to death from AIDS.
For the life of me, I cannot understand why anyone would still belong to this criminal institution. I’m starting to think that if you’re contributing money to the church, you are actually aiding and abetting criminal behavior. And as you so brilliantly put it, Matt, this is government subsidized child abuse. It boggles the mind.
Just to be clear, I’m not saying celibacy causes pedophilia. In fact I imagine studies would show pedophiles are either born with their predilection or have their disorders rooted in being abused themselves. Not that the celibacy and sexual confusion preached by the church helps — if you’ve ever seen the HBO documentary “Celibacy” you see that being raised in an atmosphere where young priests get no information about sex has disastrous consequences for their development.
But the main thing is that limiting the pool of applicants to the priesthood to celibates greatly reduces the potential number of would-be priests. Therefore the only people who will submit to that lifestyle will either be a) tortured by the decision their whole lives, or b) they’ll have agreed to submit because there’s some other motive. I once interviewed the head of a city morgue in Moscow during a time period when workers there made the equivalent of about $30 a month. He was explaining that there’s a high incidence of necrophiliacs who apply for the job, since “Odni nenormalniye budut zdes rabotat za takiye dengi” (only abnormals would work here for that kind of money). I think the same logic has to apply to the priesthood. What kind of person in modern American society volunteers for a job that doesn’t allow for normal sexual relations, but does provide lots of access to children? The math isn’t that hard.
In response to another comment. See in context »As a former celibate monk (not Christian) I can tell you that my motivation was spiritual, i.e. I wanted to follow the religious path because I believed in it’s truth. Celibacy was a secondary consideration, it was seen as a price to pay for the reward gained. That my fried, is the motivation of most who take up that path. To insinuate that people become celibate priests or monks in whatever tradition, most likely to abuse children — is ridiculous. They put themselves in the public eye in order to abuse children? 1 in 3 girls and 1 in 5 boys(if I remember correctly) are sexually molested by family members. According to your logic — if you “do the math” — why do people have children?
In response to another comment. See in context »Great last point. I’m amazed that the fashionable faith-bashers, like Matt, never seem to learn that over the top, virtually unqualified condemnations are quite easy to use back against the bearer. That’s Logic 101. My favorite bit is the endless insistence (at sites like this one) that people of faith, as a group, are against reproductive choice by virtue of their faith. Meanwhile, simple statistics (Christian majority, with most Americans pro-choice) make such a smear statistically idiotic. If an anti-choice stance were part and parcel of being religious, then we’d have a huge anti-choice majority, and we do not.
Problem is, logic doesn’t sway this crowd. There’s also the fact that, in your post, you’ve identified yourself as one of the enemy (i.e., religious), meaning you disqualified yourself from commenting, as far as many here are concerned. They’re the ideological kin of those right-wingers who consider terrorists unworthy of legal represenation because, after all, they’re terrorists (nothing circular there). I’m personally tired of alleged lefties who use liberal cred to promote a guilt-by-association philosophy. While using logic as their banner.
In response to another comment. See in context »Excellent point–it definitely skews the ratio, doesn’t it?
In response to another comment. See in context »The Child abuse in the catholic church is the most disturbing and revolting story to ever come out about priests in my lifetime as a catholic.In a strange way I thank God it has .That so many children have been abused in the most horrific way,a way that doesn’t end for a lifetime is cruel beyond words but I thank God that the light of truth has finally been shone on the criminals that are guilty of it. They belong in jail period!Those in positions of authority should be prosecuted for the crimes of covering up and sheltering the guilty. You break the law you get arrested period.The catholic church needs to be purged of this evil and the Vatican needs to stand up publicly and confess it sins and admit it’s guilt and ask for forgiveness without any protestations about the media bias against catholics or that we aren’t the only ones that have done it.My God how can such a defence even be considered? This outrage will no doubt feed and inflame all the religious bigots ,anti catholic hate mongers and anyone with an axe to grind about religion of any kind but who’s fault is that.It’s ours. We cannot however allow this crisis to destroy what has been mission and life’s work of thousands of religious people over the last two thousand years.They have ministered to the poorest of the poor ,the outcasts,those in prisons,people in place’s no one would ever go no less care about.The catholic church has built more hospitals ,schools, collages,cared for orphans and brought relief from suffering for more people than can be counted.I remember giving my nickels and dimes as a child for the nuns and missionaries in China that went around to pick up the girl babies that were left on the roadside because they were unwanted. They were not male. In Haiti before the earthquake the catholic church was feeding about 10% of the population daily because of food shortages.The church provides help to people with mental illness,family problems and so many other needs and you don’t have to be catholic to avail yourself to them. Believe me those people have real jobs. They work long hours for little money .They are on call at any hour of the night to run to a hospital or any emergency or be at a soldiers side for comfort. They dig wells in the middle of africa so villages can have water.They have also been tortured and murdered because they were catholic in greater numbers the past hundred years than at any other time and it will continue.They live lives of service to humanity. So when talking about the destruction of the church you have to ask yourself has the church been a source of Good in the world or not . Would this world be more humane without it? I say history has proven that even with the horrors of child abuse and war and all the evils of this world the catho[ic church has been a source of Good. I forget who said it but I remember a quote “If there were no religion it would be absolutely neccessary to invent it ” I’m not sure thats word perfect but I believe it’s true . I look at this world as it is with religion and can’t imagine what kind of bloody slaughterhouse it would be without it . People need to question their church and actively be a part of it especially if they are entrusting their children to it. We are the church and it can be a place of great faith ,hope and charity. Matt I’m reading your book The Great Derangement and I love it. It’s hilarious and depressing at the same time a great read
In response to another comment. See in context »not sure if i should put it this way, but god bless you for that rant. . .
“In a thousand years, once mankind has outgrown this religion thing, there won’t be any churches. Why not get a head start now? Why save this organization?”
You had me worried. I knew you’d eventually make the leap from the Catholic Church to religion in general, but it was a question of when. Congratulations on your restraint.
Outstanding column. With an economy of words, you’ve said exactly what I feel.
Personally, I see no need for any organized religion. I understand that we ‘need’ tribes and religion helps define the tribe.
“Personally, I see no need for any organized religion.”
Then obviously it has none. I mean, if you can’t see any.
And, for consistency’s sake, we’ll need to strike down health care reform, too, given that a fairly large minority of the population sees no need for it. Then again, I can’t see where opponents of health care reform are coming from, so maybe their opposition doesn’t really exist. I mean, it must not if I can’t see it. Then again, if THEY can, then it must exist. But how can it exist yet not exist at the same time? I don’t see it. Man, basing fact on perception gets messy but fast….
In response to another comment. See in context »[...] documents only the Vatican has. That’s the linchpin of liability.” Taibbi had an epic rant on this subject earlier [...]
“…you’d need a set of balls like two moons of Jupiter to say such a thing in public and expect it to fly.”
Like two of the four moons of Jupiter Pope Paul V demanded Galileo Galilei publicly recant the existence of, under pain of death, in February 1616.
These people have been doing everything imaginable to hide, conceal, and distort truths which would erode their power should they come to light — successfully — for centuries.
If this organization is timeless, so is the rot consuming it from within.
A Vatican official was asked this week if allowing priests to marry would solve the church’s problem. He replied, “Thats ridiculous – you can’t marry an eight-year-old!”
-Bill Maher
Balls as big as two moons of Jupiter.
[...] Matt Taibbi has a good take on the various excuses the Catholic Church has made about the sex scandals: [...]
Matt, the only part of this excellent piece that I think you may have got wrong is the notion that the state is going to somehow step in. I just don’t see the government taking on the church. At least not anytime soon.
Yes, it’s so busy taking on Wall Street, the corporations, and military contractors–plus, doing away with corrupt Bush-era policies–that little time is left to take on “the church.”
In response to another comment. See in context »In 2004, during the presidential campaign, the Catholic Church came out very publicly against Senator Kerry because he refused to follow the Church’s dicta on abortion. I found this a blatant interference in the American political process by an institution that is partially a foreign power. Churches should not be participating in the political process. If they do they should lose their special tax status. Beyond this, the Trinity, a doctrine arrived at by a committee many centuries ago, is about as hairbrained as it gets. Forcing people to believe this sort of obvious inanity conditions them to believe other inanities and lies, including political ones. And sexual ones. The present pope is not going to modernize. Don’t count on his successor either.
“Forcing people to believe this sort of obvious inanity conditions them to believe other inanities and lies, including political ones.”
And what conditions so many in the anti-religion camp to pass on such received platitudes?
In response to another comment. See in context »Have you ever criticized Reverend 1)Martin Luther King 2) Al Sharpton, 3)Jesse Jackson,4)David Manning, not for their views, but for being Christian ministers and getting involved in politics? How about the white ones like Pat Robertson and John Hagee? What about the Rabbis you see on Fox news beating the war drums? Do you have any idea what you’re talking about?
In response to another comment. See in context »As a recovering Catholic (including 12 years of Catholic schooling), my question is WHY would anyone continue to be a member of this church?
And I’m not even talking just about this scandal. I know many Catholics who go to church every week, who are pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, pro-stem-cell research, etc. HELLO? If you believe all those things, the CATHOLIC CHURCH DOES NOT WANT YOU!! (Well, they want your money in the collection basket, I suppose.)
Shop around! At least choose a less hateful brand of the nonsense organized religion is selling.
Great commentary Matt, as always on latent criminal enterprises in the West (GS, Vatican). The BBC had a documentary that details how Ratiznger was the Cardinal who was responsible for the handling of child molestation cases across the entire Church prior to be elected Pope and enforcement of certain practices. No one seems to raise these points. Could his election to Pope be his reward for enforcing the long standing policies of reassignment and silence. The documentary is fascinating…
http://www.freedocumentaries.org/teatro2.php?filmID=126&lan=en
people have the right to believe in cloud beings, imaginary friends and turning four degrees twice a month to please a turnip they happen to worship
they do not have the right to inflict these things on others. they do not have the right to use these beliefs as magic shields against criminal consequences and/or simple human decency and the very basic bottom rung of what is acceptable in a society.
every ten years since 1970 there is a fresh “shocking abuse scandal” with its attendent excuses and defensive cries of religious bias.
what makes this particular round of revalations so dangerous for the church is that the LAST round (2000) took six years to shake out.
because of the internet, sites like bishopaccountability.org and the clergy abuse tracker kept the story alive and revealed the true scope of what had previously been hidden by the media.
it seems like yesterday that cardinal law was run out boston…
people are less inclined to defer to the alleged power of the church.
i am no longer prepared to humor the ridiclous at the expense of another decade of lost youth.
spirituality is one thing, but im sorry- needing a to go through a bejeweled pederast or pederast supporter/protector (is there a difference? really?) to talk to God is a bridge too far.
believe in your imaginary friend. dont expect me to take you seriously.
and while we’re at it, when do we stop requiring politicians to walk that walk as well?
im sorry- belief in a magic cloud being should DISQUALIFY you from being employed to run our country.
thank you mr. tiabbi. for those of us who have physically suffered (my god the stories i heard in victim groups in boston alone…) you are a consistant voice of hope.
and the only reason i still subscribe to rolling stone.
For how long now have we heard people scream bloody murder about a precious dime of their tax dollars going to help some low-income people tide themselves between jobs, feed their families, or most recently…..see a doctor when they get sick. But nobody seems to give a shit when their tax dollars pay for the Catholic church to provide an endless supply of pre-pubescent boys’ asses to pedophiles. But hey, at least the priests won’t be using condoms when they jam their dicks in!
The majority of Americans are Christians. The majority of Americans support health care reform. And, for that matter, are pro-choice.
Something to pause and think about, for those willing (or inclined) to pause and think.
In response to another comment. See in context »Matt, I’ve been saying this a lot recently: NAMBLA is missing out on a big-time opportunity to go legit and get tax-exempt status too:
1) Dress up in frocks and those funny collars
2) Hang up a big crucifix
3) (tax-free) Profit! And legalized child-fucking!
And yes, I really do mean to compare the Catholic Church to NAMBLA, except the former gets away with it over and over again.
An interesting aside: Phoenix used to have a bishop named Thomas O’Brien.
Bishop O’Brien covered up for pedophile priests for 20 years, doing the same sickening act of shuffling predators to other (usually poor, non-white) parishes and getting the victims and their families to STFU if they knew what was good for them.
What brought O’Brien down was not yet another episode of child-fucking priests. It was a hit-and-run combined with a very clumsy attempt to cover up the crime and lie his way out of it.
Thomas O’Brien might still be bishop of the Phoenix diocese if he had simply been an honest person and done what any citizen is required to do when their vehicle is involved in an accident: stop, render aid to victims if possible, and cooperate with the police.
The victim of Bishop O’Brien’s hit-and-run was drunk and jaywalking, and was struck by a second car before dying. O’Brien most certainly would not have even been cited; again, if he had been an honest person.
O’Brien ended up resigning as bishop and received four years’ probation and 1000 hours community service, which likely amounted to ministering to parishoners. His attorneys tried to get the court to allow driving time to and from the homes of these parishoners, to be counted as part of his ‘community service’.
It seems to me a REAL man of God would have said, ‘to demonstrate my penitence, I will do 2000 hours of community service.’
The reason priests aren’t allowed to marry has been explained to me as being for the following reason: when unmarried priests die the church has no pesky widows or bratty children with whom to fight for the property or inheritance. For the same reason, nuns “marry” the church so the organisation can collect on any moola she might have lying around. What do you expect from people who base their faith on a Holy Cheesecracker?
The Church put me through school which is more than any piece of shit, trust-fund weaned asshole like you ever did for anyone. Yeah, the fucking government-run foster system is sooooooo fucking great, sending 12 year olds to go live in trailers and have a social look in on them once in, oh, about never. Go hit up grandpa for some dope money you fucking spoiled little douchebag.
wow wingnut logic at last. mr taibbi is a “spoiled little douchebag” and the church sent you to school therefore any frank discussion about the MASS RAPE AND TORTURE OF CHILDREN is therefore not permitted.
thanks for clearing that up for us.
In response to another comment. See in context »“At last,” indeed. Because, minus the foil of wingnut logic, your stance might appear a tad extreme. So, thank goodness the Faux News cavalry arrived. Thanks, pissoff, for giving the intrepid bad-mouthers of faith the validation they crave.
In response to another comment. See in context »its hard not to be “extreme” when discussing the continued accepance of an institution which promotes/hides/enjoys continued chid rape/torture and yes murder.
as one of the children raped and tortured, i have earned the right to be extreme.
this forum must have hit a nerve to attract its very own concern troll/”nonpartisan” observer, lol
In response to another comment. See in context »I’m not debating your right to condemn the Catholic Church’s illegal behavior, and you know it. You’re playing the Matt game of assuming that anyone who disagrees with you is speaking in code.
By extreme, I mean hyperbolic and simplistic. Black and white. I honestly think we make a much better, more damning case against something crazy (like much of the Catholic Church’s behavior) when we answer it without hysteria. If having been a victim entitles you to treat this very serious issue like an episode of Oprah, so be it, but don’t gripe when someone calls you on it.
In response to another comment. See in context »“The Church put me through school…”
And your comment proves it.
In response to another comment. See in context »[...] via The Catholic Church is a Criminal Enterprise – Matt Taibbi – Taibblog – True/Slant. [...]
[...] Taibbi: One expects professional slimeballs like the public relations department of Goldman Sachs to pull out the “Well, we weren’t the only thieves!” argument when accused of financial malfeasance. But I almost couldn’t believe my eyes as I read through Dolan’s retort and it dawned on me that he was actually going to use the “We weren’t the only child molesters!” excuse. Dolan must have very roomy man-robes, because it seems to me you’d need a set of balls like two moons of Jupiter to say such a thing in public and expect it to fly. But this is exactly what Dolan does; he bases his entire defense of the Church on the idea that others are equally culpable. [...]
A very good example is the molesting monster Mildura Monsignor Day http://www.bing.com/search?q=mildura+monsignor+day&src=IE-SearchBox&FORM=IE8SRC
After researching Day for nearly four years, Broken Rites released a file on Day to major newspapers in western Victoria in June 1997. These newspapers each published articles about Day (the Mildura “Independent Star”, 29 June to 7 July 1997; the Mildura “Sunraysia Daily” 30 June to 10 July 1997; and the Warrnambool “Standard”, 30 June to 2 July … See more1997).
After this, the church authorities confirmed the Broken Rites revelations and apologised to Day’s victims.
http://brokenrites.alphalink.com.au/nletter/page129-john-day.html
[...] werdenden Vertuschungsversuche durch die Vorgesetzten der Missetäter könnten einen Anfangsverdacht nach § 129 StGB [...]
In all states of the United States that I am aware of failure to report child abuse is a separate and independent criminal offense. The conversation, so far, has been rather light about this aspect of the abuse of children by employees of the Church. There is the additional difficult question of diplomacy. The Vatican is recognized as a state. How does one separate the acts of church from the acts of state? Maybe the U.S. should send the Vatican ambassador home until this matter is cleared up. One shouldn’t let the lawyers dance around the factual point that the Church is a State with about the same legal standing as France, Russia, Great Britain and employees of a State committed crimes. Other employees of the State knew of the crimes and did not report them despite their duty to. Child rapists don’t have diplomatic immunity that I am aware of so the State itself committed the crimes and has a policy of not reporting child rape. Winston Churchill once described, in his book The Island Race, the RCC as the “rapacious church” but he was metaphorically talking about land and money. We can now drop the metaphor.
Matt, if you thought you were going to hell before, now you’re definitely headed for the hot place, probably hanging with A-Rod and his Minotaur self-portrait for all eternity hearing about his World Series at-bats and Madonna’s dried up vagina in a surreal endless loop of narcissism.
Of course, I am kidding, but while I do appreciate the provocative nature of your article, I disagree with its main premise.
First, I will confess that I was raised an Irish Catholic (which is probably far different than other Catholics), meaning besides the huge photograph of John F. Kennedy hanging on our living room wall was a picture of Jesus. Sadly, sometimes the Irish confuse the two men. One walked on water and could do no wrong, the other, was the purported Son of God.
Second, although, I no longer believe in the Catholic fairy tale shoved down my throat every night of my life until 18, I try to respect others that do hold such beliefs. Not because of Church doctrine or anything like that, but just as a matter of simply human respect. But at the end of the day, it’s hard to comport scientific discovery with Christianity. I mean do you really think that the single cell organism that emerged from the early muck and mire of earth had a soul?
Third, the Catholic Church is NOT a criminal enterprise. The people who run it and govern it, however, are part of the criminal enterprise. It’s no different than our Government. The United States is not part of the criminal enterprise that has stolen our money (during the 2008 Financial Crisis); rather, the current management team are the criminals. The same is true for the Church.
Finally, since the Church will not remove those in charge, who looked the other way during the commission of these crimes, or worse, law enforcement should remove them. But, of course, that brings up another unholy alliance as many cops, prosecutors and judges are Catholic and seem to be unable to overcome their early brainwashing and serve and protect the rest of us.
Now, say 3 Hail Mary’s and an act of contrition.
Go in peace.