August 8, 2015 Sexual predators are more prevalent among rabbis, pastors and yogis than among Catholic priests But they are not as widely reported by the secular especially the international media

GREAT SAINTS OF SCANDAL BORN
Unfortunately, scandal is nothing new for the Church. There have been many times through the ages when things were much worse off than they are now. The history of the Church is like a cosine curve with many ups and downs. At the times when the Church hits its low points God raises up tremendous saints to bring the Church back to its real mission. It's almost as if in those times of darkness the light of Christ shines ever more brightly. I would like to focus on a couple of saints whom God raised up in such difficult times, because their wisdom can guide us during our own difficult time.
Francis de Sales came along after the Protestant Reformation. The Reformation was not principally about theology-although theological differences came later-but about morals. Martin Luther, an Augustinian priest, lived during the reign of perhaps the most notorious pope in history, Alexander VI. This pope never taught anything against the faith-the Holy Spirit prevented that-but he was a wicked man. He had nine children from six different concubines. He put out contracts on the lives of those he considered his enemies.
Luther, like everyone, must have wondered how God could allow a wicked man to be the visible head of his Church. All types of moral problems confronted Luther even in his own country of Germany. Priests were living in open relationships with women. Some made exaggerated claims about indulgences. There was terrible immorality among lay Catholics. Luther was scandalized, as anyone who loved God should have been. He allowed the scandal to drive him from the Church.
Eventually God raised up many saints to combat this erroneous solution and to bring people back to the Church Christ founded. Francis de Sales was one of them. At the risk of his life he went through Switzerland, where the Calvinists were popular, preaching the gospel with truth and love. Several times on his travels he was beaten and left for dead.
Someone once asked him to address the situation of the scandal caused by so many of his brother priests. What Francis de Sales said is as important for us today as it was then. He did not pull any punches. He said, "While those who give scandal are guilty of the spiritual equivalent of murder [i.e., destroying other people's faith in God by their terrible example], those who take scandal-who allow scandals to destroy their faith-are guilty of spiritual suicide." They are guilty, he said, of cutting off their life with Christ by abandoning the source of life in the sacraments, especially the Eucharist. He went among the people in Switzerland trying to prevent their committing spiritual suicide on account of the scandals. As a priest today I would say the same thing to you.
What should our reaction be then? Another saint who lived in a difficult time also can help us. Francis of Assisi lived in the thirteenth century, which was a time of terrible immorality in central Italy. Priests were setting horrible examples. Lay immorality was terrible, too. Francis himself while a young man gave scandal to others by his carefree ways. But eventually he was converted back to the Lord, founded the Franciscans, helped God rebuild his Church, and became one of the great saints of all time.
There is a story told of Francis of Assisi that sticks in my mind from one of the biographies I read as a seminarian. Once one of the brothers in the order of Friars Minor who was sensitive to scandal asked him, "Brother Francis, what would you do if you knew that a priest celebrating Mass had three concubines on the side?" Francis replied, "When it came time for Holy Communion, I would go to receive the sacred body of my Lord from the priest's anointed hands."
Francis was getting at a tremendous truth of the faith and a tremendous gift of the Lord: God has made the sacraments "priest-proof." No matter how holy or wicked a priest is, provided he has the intention to do what the Church does, then Christ himself acts through the priest, just as he acted through Judas when Judas ministered as an apostle. So whether Pope John Paul II or a priest on death row for a felony consecrates the bread and wine, it is Christ himself who acts to gives us his own body and blood. Francis was saying he was not going to let the wickedness or immorality of the priest lead him (Francis) to commit spiritual suicide.
Christ can work still and does work still even through the most sinful priest. And thank God! If we were dependent on the priest's personal holiness, we would be in trouble. Though they are chosen by God from among men, priests are tempted and fall into sin just like anyone else. But of course God knew that from the beginning. Eleven of the first twelve apostles scattered when Christ was arrested, but they came back.


THE ONLY AUTHENTIC RESPONSE
There has been a lot of talk in the media about what the response of the Church ought to be to these scandalous deeds. Does the Church have to do a better job in making sure no one with a predisposition toward pedophilia gets ordained? Absolutely. But that is not enough.
Does the Church have to do a better job in handling cases when they are reported? Absolutely. Though the Church's procedures for handling these cases are much better today than they were twenty years ago, they can always be improved. But even that is not enough.
Do we have to do more to support the victims of such abuse? Yes we do, both out of justice and out of love. But not even that is adequate. Cardinal Bernard Law has persuaded many of the medical school deans in Boston to work on establishing a center for the prevention of child abuse, which is something we should all support. But that by itself is not sufficient.
The only adequate response to this terrible scandal, the only fully Catholic response-as Francis of Assisi recognized in the 1200s, as Francis de Sales recognized in the 1600s, and as countless other saints have recognized in every century-is holiness. Every crisis that the Church faces, every crisis that the world faces, is a crisis of saints. Holiness is crucial because it is the real face of the Church.
There are always people-a priest meets them regularly, and you probably know several of them-who use excuses for why they don't practice the faith, why they commit spiritual suicide. It may be that a nun was mean to them when they were nine or that they find the teaching of the Church on a particular issue too burdensome. There are many people these days who say, "Why should I practice the faith, why should I go to church? The Church can't be true if God's so-called chosen ones can do the types of things we've been reading about!"
This scandal is a scaffold on which some will try to hang their justification for not practicing the faith. That is why personal holiness is so important. Such people need to find in all of us a reason for faith, a reason for hope, a reason for responding with love to the love of the Lord. The beatitudes in Christ's Sermon on the Mount are a recipe for holiness. We all need to live them more.
Do priests have to become holier? They sure do. Do religious brothers and sisters have to become holier and give ever-greater witness to God and heaven? Absolutely. All people in the Church have the vocation to be holy, and this crisis is a wake-up call.
It's a tough time to be a priest today. It's a tough time to be a Catholic today. But it's also a great time to be a priest and a great time to be a Catholic. Jesus says, "Blessed are you when men revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account. Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven" (Matt. 5:11-12).
I have been experiencing that beatitude firsthand, as have other priests I know. Earlier this week I had finished my exercise at a local gym and was coming out of the locker room dressed in my black clerical garb. Upon seeing me, a mother hurriedly moved her children out of the way and shielded them from me as I was passing. She glared at me as I passed, and when I was far enough away she finally relaxed and let her children go-as if I would have attacked them in the middle of the afternoon at a health club!
But while we all might have to suffer such insults and even slander on account of Christ, we should indeed rejoice. It's a great time to be a Christian, because this is a time in which God really needs us to show his true face. In bygone days in America, the Church was respected. Priests were respected. The Church had a reputation for holiness and goodness. Not so at the moment.


THE CHURCH WILL NEVER FAIL
For almost three years of my life in the early 1990s, while in my car I listened to nothing but tapes by Bishop Fulton J. Sheen, one of the greatest Catholic preachers in American history. On a couple of his tapes for priests' retreats, Bishop Sheen said that he preferred to live in times when the Church has suffered rather than thrived, when the Church had to struggle, when the Church had to go against the culture. It was a time for real men and real women to stand up and be counted. "Even dead bodies can float downstream," he said, pointing that many people can coast when the Church is respected, "but it takes a real man, a real woman, to swim against the current."
How true that is. It takes a real man or a real woman to stand up against the current that is flowing against the Church. It takes a real man or a real woman to recognize that when you are resisting the flood of criticism, you are safest when you stay attached to the Rock on whom Christ built his Church. This is one of those times. It's a great time to be a Christian.
Some people are predicting that the Church is in for a rough time, and maybe it is. But the Church will survive because the Lord will make sure it survives. One of the greatest comeback lines in history was uttered two hundred years ago. As his armies were swallowing up the countries of Europe, French emperor Napoleon is reported to have said to Church officials, "Je détruirai votre église" ("I will destroy your Church")." When informed of the emperor's words, Ercole Cardinal Consalvi, one of the great statesmen of the papal court, replied, "He will never succeed. We have not managed to do it ourselves!" If bad popes, immoral priests, and countless sinners in the Church hadn't succeeded in destroying the Church from within, Cardinal Consalvi was saying, how did Napoleon think he was going to do it from without?
The Cardinal was pointing to a crucial truth: Christ will never allow his Church to fail. He promised that the gates of hell would not prevail against his Church (Matt. 16:18); that the barque of Peter, the Church sailing through time to its eternal port in heaven, will never capsize-not because those in the boat won't do everything sinfully possible to overturn it but because Christ, who is captain of the boat, will never allow it to happen.
The magnitude of the current scandal might be such that some will find it difficult to trust priests in the same way as in the past. That is regrettable, though it might not be a completely bad thing. Yet you must never lose trust in Christ! It is his Church. After Judas's death the eleven apostles convened; the Holy Spirit chose Matthias to take Judas's place, and he proclaimed the gospel faithfully until he was martyred for it. In the same way today, even if some of those the Lord chose have betrayed him, he will call others who will be faithful, who will serve you with the love with which you deserve to be served.
This is a time in which all of us need to focus ever more on holiness. We are called to be saints, and how much our society needs to see this beautiful, radiant face of the Church! You are part of the solution-a crucial part. And as you go forward in Mass to receive from the priest's anointed hands the sacred body of your Lord, ask Christ to fill you with a real desire for sanctity, a real desire to show his true face.
One of the reasons I am a priest today is because when I younger I was under-impressed with some of the priests I knew. I watched them celebrate Mass and with little reverence drop the body of the Lord onto the paten, as if they were handling something of small value rather than the Creator and Savior of all, rather than my Creator and Savior. I remember praying, "Lord, please let me become a priest, so I can treat you like you deserve!" It kindled in me a great fire to serve the Lord.
Maybe this scandal can kindle in you the same thing. If you choose, this scandal can lead you down to the path of spiritual suicide. But it should inspire you to say finally to God, "I want to become a saint so that I and the Church can give your name the glory it deserves, so that others might find in you the love and the salvation that I have found."
Jesus is with us, as he promised, until the end of time. He is still in the boat. Just as out of Judas's betrayal he achieved the greatest victory in the universe-our salvation through his passion, death and resurrection-so out of this new scandal he may bring, wants to bring, a new rebirth of holiness, a new Acts of the Apostles for the twenty-first century, with each of us-and that includes you-playing a starring role. Now is the time for real men and women of the Church to stand up. Now is the time for saints. How will you respond?
Fr. Roger Landry serves in the diocese of Fall River, Massachusetts.

Pedophiles and Ordination

https://www.ewtn.com/library/Liturgy/zlitur237.htm
Rome, September 17, 2008

Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.

Q: Is it true that three things necessary to validate any of the seven sacraments are: 1) proper substance, 2) proper form, and 3) proper intentions? If true, could a man who is secretly a "hopeless" pedophile enter and complete the course of study, never having revealed his lifestyle (through deliberate omission), and become ordained? If your answer is "Yes, this is a valid sacrament," then how do we explain the proper intentions requirement? Finally, do you think this scenario has ever come to pass, is the Church legally responsible for his later misconduct, and what is your solution? -- E.N., California


A: Our reader is correct regarding the general criteria for invalidating the sacraments. Some other sacraments have added criteria, but these three are common to all.
When the Church speaks of correct intention with respect to sacramental validity, the requirement is fairly minimal. It basically means that the person administrating the sacrament and the one receiving the sacrament want to administer and receive the sacrament as the Church understands it.
It does not require a full theological knowledge of the sacrament, nor is it necessary to desire all of its specific effects. Thus it is theoretically possible for a non-Christian to validly baptize a person by simply intending to give what Christians give when they perform this rite.
This fairly simple concept makes it hard to invalidate a sacrament from the standpoint of intention. To do so requires that at the moment of the celebration the person administrating the sacrament or the person receiving it mentally oppose and deny what externally they appear to accept.
There might be cases, however, when other outside factors make it impossible for the persons involved to intend what the Church intends. For example, the Catholic Church does not accept the validity of Mormon or Jehovah's Witness baptisms for, although the rites are apparently the same, the difference in understanding who the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are make it impossible to intend to act as the Church understands.
This rather long premise is necessary in order to understand the answer to the specific question at hand.
Could a man who, during formation, deliberately hid pedophile tendencies, or indeed any other condition that would have prevented his ordination, be validly ordained? The answer, sad to say, is probably yes, for the intention required at the moment of ordination is the intention to receive the priesthood. Has this ever happened? Almost certainly yes.
In some concrete cases a hidden tendency might produce a spiritual or psychological condition so that the person becomes incapable of really intending what the Church desires when it gives priesthood. This would invalidate the sacrament but is extremely hard to prove. The Church has a special canonical process for judging the question of invalidity of sacred orders, but it is relatively rarely used.
Is the Church responsible? There is moral responsibility if any means of revealing this tendency was culpably neglected before ordination, or if it failed to act immediately once the problem became manifest. The Church would not be morally responsible if an astute man was able to overcome these preventive controls which by their very nature are fallible and subject to manipulation.
Legal responsibility depends on each country's legal system. Most countries have a concept of civil responsibility in which the Church, just as any juridical person, might be required to pay civil compensation even if not morally responsible for an action of one of its agents.
What can be done? I believe that in the last few years the U.S. bishops have put in place a series of vetting measures in seminaries and other institutions in order to assure that those who should never be ordained, effectively don't reach ordination.
This, alongside an increase in the quality of the disciplinary and spiritual life in seminaries, makes for a very uncomfortable environment for anyone attempting to get through six years of formation without a sincere motivation.
No system is ever perfect, but the situation has improved greatly and should continue to improve in the years to come.
Follow-up: Pedophiles and Ordination 

September 30, 2008
After our September 17 column on the validity of the sacrament of holy orders with respect to correct intention, a reader suggested a broader approach. He wrote:
"One of your last question-answer e-mails dealt with the intention of a sacrament as it affects the efficacy of the sacrament. I have a sidebar to that question as it relates to giving Communion to infants and children who might not be at a 'mature' understanding of the sacrament of the Eucharist. You stated: 'When the Church speaks of correct intention with respect to sacramental validity, the requirement is fairly minimal. It basically means that the person administrating the sacrament and the one receiving the sacrament want to administer and receive the sacrament as the Church understands it. It does not require a full theological knowledge of the sacrament, nor is it necessary to desire all of its specific effects. Thus it is theoretically possible for a non-Christian to validly baptize a person by simply intending to give what Christians give when they perform this rite. This fairly simple concept makes it hard to invalidate a sacrament from the standpoint of intention. To do so requires that at the moment of the celebration the person administrating the sacrament or the person receiving it mentally oppose and deny what externally they appear to accept.'
"My question is: Why doesn't this relate to infants and children concerning Communion? There seems to be an inconsistency in the practice of paedo-baptism and in the non-practice of paedo-Communion. I know that it was practiced in the West until the Council of Trent at which time it was formally changed. I also realize that the East (including Eastern Catholics as well as Eastern Orthodox) still practice paedo-Communion. Please explain. Also, in your opinion, will this practice in the West change?"


A complete answer to this question would require a full-blown treatise, but I believe that rather than inconsistency we could speak of different theological emphases that have their origin in diverse pastoral practices.
First of all, I would say that the reason for the Western practice of delaying Communion until the age of reason is basically a pastoral decision.
I do not believe that it is possible to make any sound theological objections to the Eastern practice of administering all three sacraments of initiation to infants, and it is perfectly coherent from the perspective of Eastern sacramental theology. Indeed it would be inconsistent for an Eastern Church to attempt to adopt the Western practice as initiation is intimately tied to the Eastern concept of Church and what it means to be a Christian.
The present Latin practice developed over many centuries and is therefore deeply embedded in the mindset of pastors and faithful alike as well as being encoded in law. Thus, while I believe that there is no theoretical reason why the Latin Church could not adopt the Eastern practice, the probability of this occurring is slight.
Such a change would require deep adjustments in some basic pastoral, spiritual and social presumptions, many of which have proved to be of great value in bringing souls closer to God over the centuries.
Among the reasons why the practice of infant Communion disappeared from the Western Church was the different approach to the sacrament of confirmation. In the West, the desire to maintain the bishop as ordinary minister of this sacrament led to its separation from baptism.
For many centuries first Communion was still generally administered after confirmation, resulting in a further delay in this sacrament. Until the time of Pope Pius X most children received first Communion around age 12. After the saintly Pope lowered the age of reception to around 7, more children began to receive Communion before confirmation.
Another reason was the overall drop in the practice of receiving Communion itself. The number of regular communicants started to drop around the fourth century and did not start to pick up again until the 17th. It is hard to think of administering Communion to infants when their parents received only once a year.
A practical reason was the disappearance in the West of Communion under both species, making it well-nigh impossible to administer the Eucharist to infants incapable of taking solid food. Communion under both species was never dropped from Eastern Christianity and it is administered to newborns under the species of wine.
These are just some of a complex web of causes that have led to the present practice. Reasons such as the need to ensure sufficient knowledge of the mystery one is to receive are sound, reasonable and valid in the context of the lived experience of the Latin Church. But they are practical and pastoral rather than doctrinal arguments.
Pedophilia and the Priesthood - "A Crime Against the Most Weak"

http://www.bishop-accountability.org/news2007/07_08/2007_07_21_CatholicOnline_SpecialPedophilia.htm

http://www.catholic.org/featured/headline.php?ID=4632
Rome, July 20, 2007

Here is the text of a pamphlet on "Pedophilia and the Priesthood" written by Monsignor Raffaello Martinelli, an official of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and member of the editorial commission of the Compendium of the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

Q: How does the Church evaluate cases of pedophilia committed by priests?
These crimes of pedophilia have been labeled as "a crime against the most weak," "a horrendous sin in the eyes of God," a crime "that damages the Church's credibility," characterized as "filth" by Cardinal Ratzinger in the memorable Via Crucis on Good Friday 2005, just a few days before being elected Pope. That filth is created by "many cases of sexual abuse of minors that break one's heart, and are particularly tragic when the one committing the abuse is a priest." To the bishops of Ireland, Benedict XVI in October 2006 stated once more that these are crimes that "break one's heart."
The most severe condemnation, a source of clear and unequivocal blame, is found in the words of Jesus when, identifying himself with the little ones, affirms in the synoptic Gospels: "And whoever receives one child such as this in my name receives me. Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea" (Matthew 18:5-6, Mark 9:42, Luke 17:1-2).
Acts of pedophilia are the responsibility of the individual who carries them out.
It has to do with individual cases: It should not be generalized. There are some 500,000 priests in the world, and the priests who have cases brought against them are a small percentage. Those that have been proven and ended with punishment are even less: Trustworthy, nonpartisan sources say the percentage is 0.3%, that is, three priests out of 1,000. It is necessary to distinguish between "delinquent" priests who have done and continue to do bad things, from the multitude of other priests who have dedicated and continue to dedicate their lives to the good of children and adolescents.
We must not forget that in some cases the victims themselves have subsequently retracted their baseless accusations.
It must also be said that even one pedophile priest is too many. He is a priest that never should have been a priest and he should be punished severely with no ifs, ands or buts.

The Church has been working for some time with its personnel (even priests, for example, in Italy Father Fortunato Di Noto, working with his association on Internet sites) and institutions to single out, unmask, condemn and overcome the phenomenon of pedophilia, from within and from without.

Unfortunately it must also be said that some bishops were mistaken when they undervalued the facts and limited themselves to moving, from one parish to another, a priest who was found guilty of pedophilia. For this reason, the Holy See decided in 2001 to claim for itself the judgment on those crimes.

Q: Which documents of the Holy See deal with the crimes of pedophilia?
The Holy See has put out two documents that deal with the crimes of pedophilia:
1. The instruction of March 16, 1962, "Crimen Sollicitationis," approved by Blessed Pope John XXIII and published by the Holy Office which later became the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. It was an important document to "instruct" canonical cases and laicize the presbyters involved in the vileness of pedophilia. In particular, it dealt with violations of the sacrament of confession.
2. The "Epistula de Delictis Gravioribus" (on most grave crimes), signed May 18, 2001, by then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger as prefect of the congregation. That letter's objective is to give practical execution of the norms ("Normae de Gravioribus Delictis") promulgated with the apostolic letter "Sacramentorum Sanctitatis Tutela," published on April 30, 2001, and signed by Pope John Paul II.

These documents deal with the Church's internal judicial acts, at the canonical level. Therefore they do not deal with the accusations and the provisions of the civil courts of states, which must be carried out according to their own laws. Whoever has addressed or addresses the ecclesiastical court can also address the civil court, to denounce similar crimes. Therefore the action of the Church is not aimed at retracting these crimes from the jurisdiction of the state and keeping them hidden.

There exist two paths to ascertain and condemn priests responsible for acts of pedophilia: that of the Church, with canon law, and that of the state with penal law. Each of these two paths is autonomous and independent of the other: the civil forum and the canonical forum must not be confused. This means that, whether or not a civil trial has taken place, the Church must necessarily carry out the canonical process. At the moment of the application of canonical punishment, if it is deemed that the guilty priest has been sufficiently punished in the civil forum, in that case the canonical punishment can be withheld.
In Italian law, a private citizen (this includes the bishop and anyone invested with ecclesial authority) is required to accuse [before the state] only crimes for which the penalty is life in prison. Yet, in Church law established in 1962, it was obligatory, under penalty of excommunication, to accuse [before the state] crimes of pedophilia if they happened in conjunction with the sacrament of confession. Therefore, from this point of view, the Church's legislation was more severe than that of the Italian state in punishing the crimes of pedophilia.

Q: What is the procedure followed by the Church to prosecute crimes of pedophilia committed by priests?
This is the prescribed procedure: Faced with the accusation of an act of pedophilia by a priest, the bishop (or ordinary) must first of all carry out an investigation to ascertain the certainty of the accusation. Having obtained proof, the bishop (or ordinary) must give the documentation of the case to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to follow the procedural path already contained in the Code of Canon Law. In the meantime, in some cases, the canonical judicial procedure to apply punishment can be followed -- as, for example, demission from the clerical state -- or, in other cases where, for example, the evidence is very clear, the administrative procedure can be carried out.
The seriousness with which the Church evaluates and judges acts of pedophilia is shown by the fact that with a new law passed in 2001, the Holy See (and not the local bishops) decided to reserve the right to judge those crimes. The new law says that judgments concerning "the crime against the sixth commandment committed by a cleric against a minor, under the age of 18, art. 4, are reserved to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which acts in these cases as the 'apostolic tribunal' -- as is prescribed in 'Sacramentorum Sanctitatis Tutela.'"

Q: Why does the Church reserve judgment to the Holy See?
The fact that the Pope wanted to reserve to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith -- a dicastery of the Holy See -- with the apostolic letter "Sacramentorum Sanctitatis Tutela" judgment of the acts of pedophilia committed by priests, shows that the Church considers those acts to be very serious, serious crimes on the same level of the other two serious crimes -- reserved to the Holy See -- that can be committed against two sacraments: the Eucharist and the holiness of confession. Therefore the Holy See's decision has nothing to do with wanting to hide potential scandals or to diminish the seriousness of these wicked deeds, but serves to help us understand that they are very serious crimes, to which they give the maximum attention, and for this reason they reserve judgment to one of the most important offices of the Holy See, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the faith and not "local" entities which could possibly be influenced.

Q: Why secrecy under penalty of excommunication?
In the first place, the two documents cited by the Holy See were not secret, given the fact that they were sent to all bishops -- some 5,000 -- to indicate what to do in cases of pedophilia.
The 1962 instruction calls for the excommunication of whoever reveals details about the canonical penal procedure. For this reason the Instruction dealt with the way in which to proceed in cases. Therefore we speak of the need for secrecy about the legal proceedings, equal to that called for, in civil proceedings, by the judge while an investigation is in progress. Nothing more, nothing less. As is the case with every legal procedure, even the canonical ones have steps that must be secret to allow the ascertainment of the truth and to protect the innocent.
The main reason why the instruction calls for secrecy in canonical procedures was to permit any future witnesses to come forth freely, with the guarantee that their statements would be confidential and not exposed to publicity. And as a consequence, the name of the accused was kept hidden before a sentence was given in the case.
Another reason the Holy See did not want to cover up these crimes is described in a paragraph of the 1962 document, that obligated anyone, victim or witness, that was aware of any sexual abuses occurring in the confessional to come forth with that information; if not, they would incur the penalty of excommunication.
In the new legislation of 2001, the secrecy of the legal proceedings was not only applicable to cases of sexual abuse, but also for crimes against the Eucharist and those against the sacrament of penance. The letter establishes the pontifical secrecy without establishing any punishment for the violation of that secrecy, even though it is a secret that binds the conscience in a stronger way than that of a normal secret. In this case, the reason for the secret is to protect and safeguard:
-- the good name of the accused, who is considered innocent until proven otherwise
-- the right to privacy of the victims and witnesses
-- the freedom of the superior who must freely made judgments, without being under pressure
Despite "the right to the freedom of information, it must not allow moral evil to become an occasion for sensationalism" (John Paul II, Discourse to American Bishops).
We must not forget that secrecy is needed to safeguard the dignity of the people involved: Many times those who are accused are shown to be innocent in the preliminary investigation.

Q: How are the testimonies of the victims of acts of pedophilia evaluated?
We need to underline here that:
-- the testimonies of victims need to be verified, for love of the truth and of the people involved, as is the case with other crimes;
-- in order to safeguard the right of the accused to a fair trial, both sides must be heard
-- in many cases the question arises: Why did the victim not report the crime after it happened but instead waited many years?
We must not forget that in the Anglo-Saxon world, the diocese to which the guilty priest belongs also shares the responsibility for the crimes committed and must offer economic recompense to the victim: Besides suffering from the scandal itself, the Church also suffers economically (which can be pleasing to some …)

Q: What does the Church do for the victims of these crimes?
The Church is deeply saddened for the innocent victims, as well as for those men who never should have become priests and who, in some cases, received very little condemnation for the crimes they committed.
The Church invites everyone:
-- to console the victims
-- to support them in their quest for justice
-- to immediately declare these crimes
We must not forget that the Church is also a victim, because those crimes are a serious offense to the dignity of the person, created in the image and likeness of God; and they damage Christian witness.
To the victims and to their families the Church offers:
-- assistance through its institutions and persons;
-- necessary collaboration with public institutions, when civil or penal laws call for it, with attention, delicacy and discretion for the people involved.
The Church community must, in becoming aware of these diabolical acts, know how to more severely condemn them, without confusing reservedness with a conspiracy of silence.
"The Catholic Church had to learn at her own expense the consequences of the grave errors of some of her members and has become more able to react and to prevent pedophilia. Society as a whole must realize that the protection of minors and the fight against pedophilia has a long way to go" (Father Federico Lombardi, Director of the Holy See's Press Office).
In fact, the problem of pedophilia does not only involve the Catholic Church, but is a worldwide problem, especially in the West; it afflicts various categories of persons and professions; it has many faces -- like sexual tourism, child pornography, sexual exploitation of minors: these phenomenon, according to data from the U.N., afflict more than 150 million young girls and boys. This is another alarming sign of the loss of fundamental values, like love, human dignity --especially that of minors -- and the positive sense of sexuality.
Therefore it is urgent for everyone to pay full attention to the words Benedict XVI addressed to the Irish bishops in October 2006: "Establish the truth of what happened in the past, take all measures to avoid it happening in the future, ensure that the principles of justice are respected and, above all, heal the victims and all those who have been affected by these abnormal crimes."
The Catholic response to scandal

http://www.catholic.org/featured/headline.php?ID=575&page=4

By Archbishop Raymond L. Burke, D.D., J.C.D., Diocese of La Crosse December 12, 2003

INTRODUCTION
What has happened in the last eleven months in the life of the Church in our nation is something that I could never have imagined. Having grown up in the Catholic faith, in a family which has always loved the Church and had the deepest respect and affection for her pastors, it has been most difficult for me to comprehend the seemingly unending stories of the sexual abuse of children and young people by Catholic priests and bishops, recounted in the newspapers and through the other communications media. It has been equally difficult to comprehend the reports of the callous manner of handling such abuse on the part of certain Church authorities. What has been a scandal for so many in the Church has also been a scandal for me as a bishop of the Church. I have to confess to times of profound anger with individuals who have perpetrated such crimes and with bishops who have not taken appropriate action to discipline the perpetrators and to protect children and young people from such profound harm.
Having met and spoken with a number of victims of sexual abuse by members of the clergy, I have painfully come to understand more and more the long-term and devastating effects of the breach of the most sacred trust between a child and his or her spiritual father. It has been understandingly difficult, at times, to respond with the attitude of Christ, with the attitude which our Catholic faith teaches us and in which our Catholic faith forms us, to the scandal which you and I have suffered.
For me as bishop, the scandal personally suffered is profoundly deepened by the accusations, frequently expressed, that I, too, have been only interested in covering up the sins of priests, without concern for the victims who have suffered at their hands, and that I, too, have squandered the patrimony of the Church in doing so.
From a purely human point of view, it is a fact that today is not a good time to be a bishop. When you have given your entire life to the service of the Church and have tried always to teach Catholic faith and morals, and to live accordingly, it is painful to recognize that you now have been placed in a category of persons, subject to the strongest distrust on the part of the very persons whom you have been called to serve and for whom you have given your life in response to God's call.
But, from the perspective of God's will for us, whatever time a priest is called to serve the Church as a bishop is a good time. Our faith teaches us that we are called to live in these times and to bear the cross of Christ in carrying out His mission, no matter how difficult the challenges may be. Our faith leads us to seek a deeper understanding of the Catholic response to scandal, so that the suffering of the scandal will not be useless but rather will become the means of growth in holiness of life for us personally and for the whole Church.

THE NATURE OF SCANDAL
The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches us: "Scandal is an attitude or behavior which leads another to do evil... Scandal is a grave offense if by deed or omission another is deliberately led into a grave offense." (CCC, No. 2284) Scandal becomes more grave if it is caused by a person in authority or if those affected are weak or suffer very much already.
Our Lord used some of his harshest words to indicate the gravity of the sin of the man who would lead one of the "little ones" into sin. (Mt 18:6) Our Lord observes that it is inevitable that scandals will occur. (Mt 18:7) We are sinful human beings and sadly at times we commit sinful acts which are the cause of scandal to another. But our Lord further observes:
"Nonetheless, woe to that man through whom scandal comes!" (Mt 18:7)
So serious is the moral obligation to avoid scandal that we are admonished not only not to do wrong but also not to appear to do wrong. When a person acts, he or she must always consider the appearance of the act to be done. If a reasonable person could take the act to be gravely immoral, then a person is not to commit the act, even if there is no immorality involved at all.
Here there is a delicate balance, for the viewer of the act can engage in what we call pharisaical scandal. Saint Paul teaches the Corinthians: "Take care, however, lest in exercising your right you become an occasion to the weak." (1 Cor 8:9) We must consider the true weight of our action before another and, if it would legitimately cause scandal, then we must forego the action, even some otherwise good action. On the other hand, we are not obliged to conform our actions to the mind of someone who looks to be scandalized and does not consider reasonably the nature of an action.
As I mentioned before, the gravity of scandal is significantly increased, if the person who causes it enjoys authority, especially authority in the Church. The Catechism of the Catholic Church tells us: "Scandal is grave when given by those who by nature or office are obliged to teach and educate others." (CCC, No. 2285) It is difficult for us to comprehend the severity of the wound inflicted upon someone who is led into a sinful act by the very person he or she has been taught to trust as a teacher of faith and morals. Our Lord refers to the perpetrators of such scandals as "wolves on the prowl" who come to us in "sheep's clothing." (Mt 7:15)
There is another way by which we become guilty of scandal, that is by permitting or contributing to the erosion of the teaching and living of Catholic morals. (cf. CCC, No. 2286) Those who have responsibility for handling on Catholic moral teaching bear a heavy responsibility for the erosion of knowledge and conviction regarding what the Church teaches to be right and good. The cause of scandal "by laws or institutions, by fashion or opinion" lies at the root of the scandal of clergy sexual abuse which we have been suffering now for many months.

DISOBEDIENCE OR DISSENT: CAUSE OF SCANDAL
There is no question that individual disordered and immoral acts committed by priests and bishops are the principal and direct cause of the grave scandal which the whole Church is suffering in our nation at this time. But how is it that priests or bishops commit such acts which betray completely their priestly character and office?
Surely, it is a question of human weakness, of a failure to fortify oneself morally and spiritually, of placing oneself in the occasion of sin, of engaging in vices which easily lead to such sin. But it is also a question of failing to accept and hand on the Church's moral teaching in its integrity. I have frequently recalled the words of an elderly professor of canon law, who was my professor some twenty years ago, regarding the Church's discipline of clerical celibacy. He frequently told us: "Where there are problems of chastity, there are problems of obedience." We must recognize that the immoral acts which are the cause of scandal are fundamentally acts of rebellion against God's commandments. Such disordered acts are committed by persons who refuse to bend their heads in obedience to the teaching authority of the Church and become, instead, a law unto themselves.
Specifically, many of the acts which are the source of the present scandal are homosexual acts committed with young people. Granted that there are some cases of true pedophilia, that is disordered acts committed with pre-adolescent children, which have the most devastating, long-lasting effect on the victims, the majority of the acts of sexual abuse are, in fact, committed with adolescent children and are homosexual in character.
Although such acts have been committed throughout the history of mankind, the frequency of such acts is greatly increased in a society which no longer upholds the sanctity of the marriage act which, by its nature, expresses the perpetual, faithful and procreative love of man and woman in marriage. Once sexual union is separated from its inherently marital and procreative nature, once contraception is taught as moral, then the way is open for sexual activity, contrary to God's law, according to the world's way of thinking. It is not by accident that the attack on the Church's perennial teaching regarding contraception was accompanied by the erosion of the Church's teaching regarding solitary sexual activity and same-sex sexual activity, both of which can never be truly unitive and procreative.
The dissent from the Church's moral teaching regarding artificial contraception, sterilization, homosexual acts, and self-abuse, which permeates culture, in general, and has also entered into the Church, has its profoundly harmful effect on the thinking and acting of the faithful, in general, and also of the shepherds of the flock. It is not uncommon today to witness a kind of pick-and-choose approach to the Church's moral teaching on the part of many Catholics. If the shepherds do not teach clearly and consistently the truth about human sexuality, then the flock will be likely led astray by the thinking of the world.
For Satan, the victory is even more complete, if he can corrupt the thinking of the shepherds themselves. According to an old canonical adage, "Corruptio opitimi pessima est," "The corruption of the best is the worst." Recall the words of the Prophet Zechariah: "Strike the shepherd that the sheep may be dispersed, and I will turn my hand against the little ones." (Zechariah 13:7)
Dissent is fundamentally rebellion against the teaching authority of the Church, a refusal to practice the virtue of obedience. At first, it may express itself in rebellion against some doctrine of the faith. But, once it becomes a habit, it will express itself in immoral practices, a rebellion against the moral order which God has written in our nature and teaches us through the word of Christ.
Seminary education must be especially attentive to the danger of dissent, lest in teaching morality immorality be taught. Rightly, the Holy See has announced an Apostolic Visitation of seminaries as a key part of the response to the scandal of clergy sexual abuse. The Apostolic Visitation will "focus on the question of human formation for celibate chastity based on the criteria found in Pastores Dabo Vobis." (United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People [June 2002], Article 17) The United States Bishops have publicly pledged their complete cooperation with the Apostolic Visitation. (cf. Ibid)
In his address to the Cardinals of the United States on April 23, 2002, our Holy Father underlined the essential connection between sound doctrine and moral integrity. He reminded the Cardinals: "It must be absolutely clear to the Catholic faithful, and to the wider community, that Bishops and superiors are concerned, above all else, with the spiritual good of souls. People need to know that there is no place in the priesthood and religious life for those who would harm the young. They must know that Bishops and priests are totally committed to the fullness of Catholic truth on matters of sexual morality, a truth as essential to the renewal of the priesthood and the episcopate as it is to the renewal of marriage and family life." (No. 3b; quoted in Benedict J. Groeschel, C.F.R., From Scandal to Hope, p. 202)

FAILURE OF CATECHESIS AND DISSENT
The dissent which is at the foundation of the sexual abuse scandal has had its most devastating effect in catechesis, especially in the teaching of the faith to children and young people but also to adults, for example, those who are preparing to come into the full communion of the Roman Catholic Church. Saint Paul reminds us: "Faith then comes through hearing, and what is heard is the word of Christ." (Rom 10:17) When catechesis has not presented the Catholic faith in its integrity, then the faith of the catechized will be weak and their moral life lacking. We are reaping today the fruits of more than thirty years of catechesis which has not been attentive to presenting the Catholic faith in its completeness. Especially regarding morals, fundamental principles like the principle of cooperation have not been taught and are not understood. Even more serious is the loss of a sense of the first laws of nature which safeguard and promote human life, the family and the practice of religion. (cf. Saint Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I-IIæ, q. 94)

What we do not teach as catechists, whether we be priests or members of the laity or consecrated persons, we do not believe as we ought. In our case, there may be yet some vestige of the teaching within us, which, with the help of God's grace, will be fanned again into flame. For those we catechize, however, the truth of faith or morals may never have been taught and, therefore, the catechized is done a grave injustice, touching upon his own salvation.

There is a radical need to teach again, in its integrity, the natural moral law, especially in a post-Christian culture still influenced so heavily by rationalist philosophy, and the law divinely revealed in the Holy Scriptures and faithfully handed on through the Magisterium. The natural moral law regarding human life and human sexuality must be taught as the foundation upon which to understand the divinely revealed law.

THE CATHOLIC RESPONSE TO THE SCANDAL
In considering the Catholic response to the scandal, it will help us to consider the teaching of Saint Francis of Assisi, who wrote the following in his Admonitions to the friars: "Nothing should upset a religious except sin. And even then, no matter what kind of sin has been committed, if he is upset or angry for any other reason except charity, he is only drawing blame upon himself." (No. XI)
The first response to the great scandal which we are now suffering must be an act of the greatest possible charity both toward the victims and the perpetrators of the crime. Prayer and reparation must be primary and will be the most efficacious in healing all who have been so deeply wounded. Any other response fails in the charity which is most required in the situation.
In this regard, I wish to say a word about the healing of victims. For the victim, there is the great temptation to make the grave injustice, the deep wound, which he has suffered the whole point of reference of his life. Then, there is no place for Christ to enter into the soul and to pour forth the healing ointment of his love upon the wound which aches so painfully. The victim also is not able to go forward with his life, placing his wounded heart into the Sacred Heart of Jesus and receiving the grace of healing immediately. No matter how grave the act of sexual abuse, our response in Christ must be to hate the sin, but to filled with hope in the healing grace of Christ and filled with love for the sinner.
Secondly, for priests and bishops, there must be a renewed attention to practice prayer and the acts for reparation for the "grave offense to God and the deep wound inflicted upon his holy people." (cf. United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People, Conclusion) The Bishops observed in the Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People: "Closely connected to prayer and acts of reparation is the call to holiness of life and the care of the diocesan/eparchial bishop to ensure that he and his priests avail themselves of the proven ways of avoiding sin and growing in holiness of life." (Conclusion) There must be a new energy and enthusiasm among priests and Bishops for prayer before the Blessed Sacrament, the offering of the Holy Mass which is the heart and source of the entire priestly ministry, for the regular confession of sins in the Sacrament of Penance and the practice of acts of mortification by which the soul is purified and prepared for acts of holiness.
In his Apostolic Letter Novo Millennio Ineunte, our Holy Father calls us "to rediscover the full practical significance of chapter 5 of the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church Lumen Gentium, dedicated to the "universal call to holiness." (No. 30c) As he rightly points out, "the gift in turn becomes a task." (No. 30d) In urging that holiness be the foundation of all pastoral planning, he states strikingly: "It implies the conviction that, since Baptism is a true entry into the holiness of God through incorporation into Christ and the indwelling of his Spirit, it would be a contradiction to settle for a life of mediocrity, marked by a minimalist ethic and a shallow religiosity." (No. 31b) The temptation to follow a minimalist ethic and to live a shallow religiosity besets us all in our time, including priests and Bishops. Now, as our Holy Father reminds us, "[t]he time has come to re-propose wholeheartedly to everyone this high standard of ordinary Christian living: the whole life of the Christian community and of Christian families must lead in this direction." (No. 3c)
If the high standard of ordinary Christian living is to be effectively proposed anew, it will come through a renewal of catechesis at all levels and the dedication of faithful theologians and teachers of the faith in providing the practical tools for teaching the Catholic faith and its practice, with integrity, to our children and young people especially. Above all, it will come from a sound teaching of moral theology in our seminaries and Catholic universities.
The Catholic response to scandal is charity. Yes, the scandal must be acknowledged, the gravity of the sin must be recognized and deplored, but, not out of any self-righteousness or other motive, but out of love of God and neighbor. True abhorrence of the sin will lead to the ever greater love of the sinner, to prayer for his reconciliation and acts of reparation for the grave offense given to God and the grave harm caused to the Body of Christ. The temptation is to remain in our horror at the sin and to leave unexamined and uncultivated the deepest motive of the horror at the sin, which is divine charity.

THE QUESTION OF "ZERO TOLERANCE"
The immensity of the present scandal, which has been so heavily cultivated by the communications media, has led to a response by the Church called "zero tolerance." Clearly, there has to be "zero tolerance" for the sin of sexual abuse of children and young people. In other words, everything must be done to prevent any future acts of such abuse. At the same time, it is fundamentally contrary to the Gospel to speak of "zero tolerance" of any sinner, including a priest who has so gravely betrayed his priestly character and mission. Rather, care must be taken to come to know the true nature and extent of his sinful acts, and to assist him in living a life of repentance. The sinner must be helped by our acts of reparation, and he must be helped to make reparation for the sin committed.
On the part of all, the love of the truth, which expresses itself always in charity, must guide the response to the sin of child sexual abuse by the clergy and to the sinner. The response to the sinner cannot be guided by any agenda, but, rather, must be guided by the good of the individual and the good of the whole Church. When the truth is sought above all else, both the good of the individual and the good of the Church will be served without any contradiction. It is never permitted to serve only the good of the individual or only the good of the Church. Both must be served always.

CONCLUSION
I offer these reflections out of deepest love of the Church and of you who love the Church deeply and desire to serve the Church, the Bride of Christ, and to make her beauty shine forth in the world for the salvation of all. I offer these reflections out of deepest sorrow for the wounds inflicted upon the Church by us, her sinful members, and out of the deepest desire for the repentance and reparation which will heal those wounds, so that the beauty of the Bride of Christ may be seen by all and all may be attracted to Christ alive for us in the Church.
Before the profound harm to the Church in America and her members, caused by the scandal of child sexual abuse by the clergy, we turn to Our Lady of Guadalupe, Mother of God and Mother of America. She came to our continent in 1531 to announce the message of God's merciful love, incarnate in the Child conceived in her immaculate womb. Only the holiness of her Child, our Redeemer, will overcome the gravity of the present scandal and heal the deep wound which it has inflicted upon the Church. Let us pray, through the intercession of Our Lady, for holiness of life for bishops and priests, and all members of the Church.
In conclude with words of our Holy Father, which express what must be our deepest conviction and our greatest desire: "We must be confident that this time of trial will bring a purification of the entire Catholic community, a purification that is urgently needed if the Church is to preach more effectively the Gospel of Jesus Christ in all its liberating force. Now you must ensure that where sin increased, grace will all the more abound (cf. Rom 5:20). So much pain, so much sorrow must lead to a holier priesthood, a holier episcopate, and a holier Church." (Pope John Paul II, A Papal Address to the Cardinals of the United States, April 23, 2002, No. 4a)

The Pope and Pedophilia - the Plain Truth