"It was not until media coverage and public pressure mounted that the Vatican’s approach seemed to shift from therapeutic to disciplinary.." Absolutely. That's why we NEED the Pillar. Media coverage seems to be the only way to correct abuses that will only swept under the rug if not highlighted.
These questions related to the mercy/justice dichotomy are very important. They get down into questions of: What is forgiveness and to what degree does it presuppose a frank acknowledgment that wrongdoing has occurred? Oftentimes one sees a sort of pseudo-forgiveness in which even fully investigating or acknowledging the crime is itself seen as "unmerciful" or cruel.
The most troubling bit for me is that such damning photo evidence would be dismissed as a political hit job. It's a sad reminder of how deeply entrenched ideologies have become in the Church, even (especially?) at the highest levels.
An excellent piece of journalism! Unfortunately pastoral myopia by bishops isn't limited to sexual abuse, but is also true of personnel administration, finances, liturgical abuses, etc. Throughout the Synodal process, it's one of the most common complaints I hear.
I’m making a generalization to be sure, but in my experience priests simply don’t like conflict, real or anticipated, and will tend to avoid it. Combined with the church’s emphasis on forgiveness and redemption (and a touch of the old boys’ club), it’s rare when any kind of misconduct is addressed. It’s also hard to sit on the outside of the circle of bishops and wonder if everyone has dirt on everyone else and that’s why discipline (in the sense of reorienting behavior) is rarely administered.
Great analysis, JD. Keep up the good work!
"It was not until media coverage and public pressure mounted that the Vatican’s approach seemed to shift from therapeutic to disciplinary.." Absolutely. That's why we NEED the Pillar. Media coverage seems to be the only way to correct abuses that will only swept under the rug if not highlighted.
These questions related to the mercy/justice dichotomy are very important. They get down into questions of: What is forgiveness and to what degree does it presuppose a frank acknowledgment that wrongdoing has occurred? Oftentimes one sees a sort of pseudo-forgiveness in which even fully investigating or acknowledging the crime is itself seen as "unmerciful" or cruel.
The most troubling bit for me is that such damning photo evidence would be dismissed as a political hit job. It's a sad reminder of how deeply entrenched ideologies have become in the Church, even (especially?) at the highest levels.
An excellent piece of journalism! Unfortunately pastoral myopia by bishops isn't limited to sexual abuse, but is also true of personnel administration, finances, liturgical abuses, etc. Throughout the Synodal process, it's one of the most common complaints I hear.
I’m making a generalization to be sure, but in my experience priests simply don’t like conflict, real or anticipated, and will tend to avoid it. Combined with the church’s emphasis on forgiveness and redemption (and a touch of the old boys’ club), it’s rare when any kind of misconduct is addressed. It’s also hard to sit on the outside of the circle of bishops and wonder if everyone has dirt on everyone else and that’s why discipline (in the sense of reorienting behavior) is rarely administered.