The coverup is what is, um, "special". That it went on so long and thoroughly at so many levels, that it's so elaborate, that they're so indignant about it. That law enforcement rarely? Never? Start getting warrants and kicking in doors.

When you'd think, or at least you'd hope, that they'd be simply HORRIFIED and rush to help the people that were hurt.

Which, actually, is what the Hare Krishnas did. When ISKCON found out there were abusers in their residential schools they shut the frikkin schools, they hired an outside investigator, they set up a fund for the victims, they bankrupted themselves cleaning out that cancer.

Predators are going to make efforts to get near vulnerable children. It is going to happen in religious institutions too. Sometimes its prosecuted, sometimes its hushed-up... but Rome's hush-up is special in its hugeness.

Now I'm watching clips from The Music Man on YouTube. That show has a whole lot of songs with really fun rhythms.

I think the entire hierarchical structure of the Catholic Church enables abuse of all sorts to happen. And when you run around and claim papal infallibility (with the extension of that some type of infallibility of clergy in general) then you create a system where victimization is easier to cover up.

So much this.

I don't think priests (or Catholics generally, to be clear) are necessarily especially prone to anything, or that any geog region makes a difference. But I do think that a) it's plausible that men who are both religious and uncomfortabe with sex and their own sexuality (and that's not unrelated), might gravitate to the church; and b) that is compounded by the rigid hierarchical structure and culture of denial and secrecy to create a uniquely horrific scenario.

brenda, I totally agree with that aspect too!

I was commenting on the geography mainly because a few years back, I remember reading commentary from some of the bishops from Africa who were basically saying that the abuse was uniquely American and I just think that is so not true. Lemme see if I can find a link.

Trudy, exactly! This is the part that's so hard to understand. I'll have to look up what the Krisnas did. But yeah.

At this point ( and I haven't looked deeply into it, which I need to do) when the Milwaukee stuff came up, the mention of Rembert Weakland, formerly the archbishop, was that it happened before his time but he was shouting at the Vatican to do something. Which fits with my view of him. I believe he's been excommunicated.

(

OK, on Dateline this body has been moved several times. I am officially creeped.

But I do think that a) it's plausible that men who are both religious and uncomfortabe with sex and their own sexuality (and that's not unrelated), might gravitate to the church; and b) that is compounded by the rigid hierarchical structure and culture of denial and secrecy to create a uniquely horrific scenario.

One of the things that surprises me when you hear church officials talk about it is that they talk about the temptation of "sex". Something is not clicking in their heads that this is WAY worse than plain old betrayal of celibacy vows. So in addition to the dude who's an actual pedophile you have a supervisor who is kind of a twelve year old about "doing it".

Hmmm... I can't find the exact quote. I think the Guardian has an interesting piece that says:

The new millennium saw the US Catholic church implode over allegations, lawsuits and bankruptcies. This eroded public confidence in the church, which struggled to position itself as a moral authority and source of leadership.

The current abuse cases threaten to do the same in Europe. The Catholic hierarchy is coming to terms with increased secularisation in the west and is instead looking to Africa and China for renewal.

I don't think Africa or China have any less abuse than Europe and the US.

Also, in the article:

The order [by now-Pope Benedict] was made in a confidential letter and was sent to every Catholic bishop. Among other things it asserted the church's right to hold its inquiries behind closed doors and keep the evidence confidential for up to 10 years after the victims reached adulthood. Existence of the letter was made public in 2005, a week after he was named pope.

Is part of why I can't get enough of reading about this. It's horrible and I have to admit a large amount of schadenfreude on this one.

Among other things it asserted the church's right to hold its inquiries behind closed doors and keep the evidence confidential for up to 10 years after the victims reached adulthood.

That's what makes me want some fucking warrants, you know? Not ACTUALLY a law unto yourself, buck-o.

It wasn't just a divorce Henry VIII wanted, he wanted to be his country's only monarch.

One of the things that surprises me when you hear church officials talk about it is that they talk about the temptation of "sex". Something is not clicking in their heads that this is WAY worse than plain old betrayal of celibacy vows. So in addition to the dude who's an actual pedophile you have a supervisor who is kind of a twelve year old about "doing it".

It's amazing how tone-deaf the stuff they say is.

Is part of why I can't get enough of reading about this. It's horrible and I have to admit a large amount of schadenfreude on this one.

Me too.

When it was just Boston (and the rest of the US, but okay), the Vatican could write it off as an anomaly. If anything good has happened, it's that Ireland and Germany show that a) it's not just some American fuck-up and b) that the highest levels of the church were involved. For once, they can't ignore it.

They can downplay it, and god, they're debasing themselves trying to do it. But they canm't write it off the way they used to.

(First version of this post lost to cat rolling over on the keyboard. Hopefully this one makes it through.)