Clare’s blog, aka rantspace

I seem to have had a lot to say about Catholics lately, in spite of my keenness to ensure that people don’t see clergy sexual abuse as a primarily Catholic problem. I guess they’re in the news a lot because of WYD, which is giving me fodder for ranting.

However, it’s also important to note that the reason it’s not just a Catholic problem is the main reason why I blog about any denomination, and not just the one in which I was abused (Anglican). Clergy abuse stems from a hierarchical power structure, which leads the dominant class/es to misuse and abuse the subordinate groups. That’s why almost no clergy sexual abuse is of adult males. Females, yes, because they’re subordinate in the church power structure. Children (both male and female), for the same reason. The few instances of adult males being abused – young priests by clergy superiors, usually – show clear indications of the power issues, involving other dynamics such as associated emotional blackmail (see here for example).

So this rant is really about power, and yet another instance of the patent reinforcing of church power.

Those who follow these matters will be aware of (Catholic) Bishop Geoffrey Robinson’s book, published last year, “Confronting Power and Sex in the Catholic Church: Reclaiming the Spirit of Jesus”. In it, he not only disclosed his own (non-clergy) sexual abuse as a child, but also detailed his motivations for working within the church for recognition and redress for clergy abuse victims. And in doing so, he reiterated the doctrine of the primacy of conscience (from the Commentary on the Code of Canon Law). Now this is a major problem for Cardinal Pell, who denies such a doctrine and has said that if it exists it ought to be discarded.

Clearly, a doctrine of individual conscience presents danger for those who would like to see the church’s authority as absolute. And Robinson, by publishing his views in a book, has thrown the Australian Conference of Catholic Bishops into an apparent ferment. Read their response in their official statement here. Distilled of its polite praise of Robinson’s work for victims, the essential thrust is “don’t anyone dare believe that you should do anything other than what the Church tells you, because the Church is the ultimate authority, and is always right”.

And I don’t see how any organisation, while maintaining such an overbearing power structure, can ever rid itself of abuse within its ranks. Nor, incidentally, is it likely to respond well to victims who, by virtue of their history as well as their low status as lay people, are nonentities challenging the authority structure.

Pardon me for being cynical but first there was this:

Pope Benedict XVI has begun his first papal visit to
the United States by speaking out against the sexual abuse scandals
that have rocked the US church in recent years. He told journalists
on the flight from Rome he was “deeply ashamed” of the scandals, and
he vowed that paedophiles would not be allowed to continue as
priests or to be ordained into the Roman Catholic priesthood. [ENI-08-0309]

1. At this point he was not scheduled to meet with any abuse victims, but adverse media publicity changed that later.
2. I’ll be very interested to watch and see if all the 4% of US RCC priests identified by the church itself as abusers get sacked. I’d lay bets on it not happening.

And then there was this:

Pope Benedict XVI has met privately and prayed with several survivors of sexual abuse by clergy during his visit to the United States, in a move that is believed to be the first time a pontiff has met with abuse survivors. The unannounced meeting on 17 April, reportedly at Benedict’s request, was held at a chapel at the papal nuncio’s residence in Washington. [ENI-08-0316]

1. If he met with (and prayed with) abuse survivors in a chapel, then he didn’t meet with the most damaged ones. Because the most damaged ones a) have lost their faith and wouldn’t pray, b) wouldn’t go into a chapel, and c) probably wouldn’t want prayer in a chapel to be the focus of the meeting.
2. Notice that in spite of clergy abuse having been on the RCC radar since at least 1985, when an internal report told them that it was a public relations problem just waiting to explode (not to mntion years of individual victims pleading to meet with both this and the previous pope), in 23 years this is the first time a pope has bothered to put abuse victims into his schedule. And he only did it at the last minute due to media pressure.

And finally there was this:

Pope Benedict XVI, head of the worldwide Roman
Catholic Church, capped a six-day visit to the United States, his
first as pontiff, with a public Mass at New York’s Yankee Stadium in
which he declared the need for US Catholics to be obedient to church
authority. While the 15-20 April visit is likely to be remembered for
the Pope’s public declarations of shame about the sexual abuse
scandals that rocked the Catholic Church in the United States, the
trip also provided an opportunity for Benedict to meet a range of US
Christian leaders. [ENI-08-0322]

“Okay, you abuse victims (and everyone else) – we may have abused you in the past, and manipulated and lied to you, and fobbed you off and refused to deal appropriately with your pain and suffering – not to mention refusing to deal with the problem priests in our ranks – but you’ve still gotta do what you’re told by the church.”

I’d like to know how any clergy abuse victim is supposed to have faith that the situation is going to get any better, given that the church still asserts control and moral authority – the two things that enable abuse to happen and be covered up over and over.