Abuse, the Globe, and the 'power of God'

It was one of The Globe's finest hours covering the clergy abuse scandal. Everyone knows it. Those who resent The Globe for covering these events are truly out of touch with reality and simply can't get over the fact that their church profoundly failed them. Their denial and frustration are taken out on The Globe when it should be directed at Rome.

Well, Law thought he was going to be the first American pope too. I don't know how much "his word" is really listened to by the people of Massachusetts anymore.

If Mr. Paulson is truly wondering what Cardinal Law is thinking/feeling, he should call or otherwise contact him; isn't that what a reporter does?

I do not want the Globe to close, because i feel for them and their familes, especially Paulson, Kevin Cullen and Jeff Jacoby, to name only 3. However, I do want the the gl-obe to change its ultra-liberal editorial slant, which i blame more on the higher ups.

"I think what Law meant at the time was that he wanted God to influence the
Globe..." Of course that is what he meant' ; you don't believe in curses, do you?

I was 100% for the globe spotlight team's report on the disgusting clergy sex abuse scandal, including its illumination of the bishops' non-supervision (to say the least) of the perps. However, at the time, i remember a sense that the globe enjoyed the situation too much, that the bastion of conservatism which is the Catholic Church, was on such rocky seas, and they threw salt in the wounds,
the wounds which were self-inflicted. This i think is the reason for any Catholic schadenfreude about the globe's difficulties, not the spotlight report itself.

And Michael, you must be darkly kidding, about the tragic fire at Sacred Heart being an "act of God." I think it can be more prosaically attributed to bad wiring of an ancient refrigerator.

If Bernie Law claims credit for killing the globe, he is a liar.
Now for the news.
In 1992 the Globe was an independent and the familly owning it, if I remember correctly, were the Taylors. They came to it by way a of trust. One of the trust founders was Jordan Marsh (yes, that one). And the trust had a limited life span, 99 years. No trust can last forever here.
So the Taylors could hang on to it, then close the paper or sell it. As it went the NY Times bought it. But that incorred debt. It ran a lot like when MetLife bought the
New England. They pomised to keep things running as they were for 10 years. It actually lasted 2, which is not bad for these kind of things.
Now, for those of you with long memories, when the NYTimes honesty boxes started showing up, thet was when the globe was bought out. But it was sell off or die and nothing to do with fat Bernie.
All of this was well covered by the news, on the web.
I have some professional friends who do consulting to the newpaper industry. In the production area, and trust me on this, the owners of newspapers are simply backward looking. I am not talking journalists (you can get them anywhere and cheap) but the actually owners of the paper who try to run it for a profit and they are concerned with the people who pay the bills. The advertisers. (Advertisers are another group of backward looking people as well). So newspapers are in a tight fiscal fix. The one dominant paper per city was actually favored by advertisers, they always complained about the costs, but they loved the coverage.
That is passing rapidly. And we may very well see the return of viewpoint newspapers like they still have in England. The advertisers won't like it, but I can live with that.

No matter what happens to the Globe, thousands of children in the US and across the world are safer today because the newspaper tirelessly exposed hundreds of predator priests and corrupt bishops, and inspired hundreds of other journalists to look more critically at supposedly virtuous institution. That achievement will live forever.

David Clohessy
National Director, SNAP
Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests
SNAPnetwork.org

Because I am an atheist I cannot say that Cardinal Law should burn in hell -- there is no hell for him to burn in' and he certainly wouldn't get beamed upward if there were a heaven. But based on Law's beliefs, he certainly is strongly eligible, along with the wayward priests for whom he covered up, to take the hot trip downward. To think that this religious leader would call the wrath/power of God? down on the Globe for printing the truth shows the worthlessness of him and religion. The Globe may or may not survive. But whatever its time here, it has shown much more worthiness than the cardinal.

What amazing myopia some people possess. The Globe is far from the first and certainly not the only newspaper to face financial peril today, nor is traditional media the only industry trying to figure out how to revise a business model to remain solvent in an "internet world." Yet certain commentators want to blame the Globe's problems on the sex abuse reports and some perceived left-leaning liberalism? How silly those people are.

Good lord, these people are bloody strange. They want the Globe to die because they reported the truth about the dirty little secret of the Catholic Church....sucker please. I hope they themselves get buggered by someone just for a sweet taste of revenge.

Oh the Globe will not close. It will be around for a very long time.

When I read the title I just figured it was another story from the Globe about Obama. He is your God. You praise his words every day and never criticize the man even when he's wrong.

The "power of God" is redemptive, not destructive, as any priest who celebrates the Eucharist daily knows very well. The spat over Cardinal Law's use of the phrase is just one in a long line of exhibits of at least semi-intentional misunderstanding in order to take offense where none was offered.

I agree 100% with Mr. Paulson that the abuse story was not aimed "over the heads" of the readers - it was aimed squarely at a visceral reaction from them. However, Domenico Bettinelli's comments are spot-on: the Globe has slimed its way onto too many people's "who cares?" list by trying to pass off a relentless partisanship as journalistic high ground. Not every newspaper will fail, and even some shill sheets will do better, because they don't pretend to be objective, and so don’t insult their audience. Even my rather lefty wife gave up on the Globe a couple years ago as a result of the relentless promotion of the gay agenda on almost every page of the paper. If you guys can't see this, you are as dumb as you are misguided.

Ultimately, many factors will lead to the Globe's eventual financial demise - and it's certainly true that promoting scandal is often quite profitable. But it's about more than technology changing reading habits. And it's not just about growing illiteracy, either. People want dependable, intelligent information, and are willing to pay for it. But it's become nigh impossible to find a local source that is trustworthy. The “news” has become nothing but a means of manipulating people for political purposes. Thanks, but no thanks.

Whatever happens to the Globe — and I hope it stays around a long, long time — its coverage of the abuse scandal earned it, in my view, a very special place in Heaven.

Church sex scandals aside, no one can argue that the Globe's writing has taken a severe downturn lately, in style, objectivity, and accuracy. Lately being: the past two years or so.

I stopped subscribing to the Globe awhile ago because I found it wasn't worth the cost. Instead, I pay online for some subscriptions (WSJ) and turn to the Globe when I need to remind myself why living as a fiscally conservative libertarian in Massachusetts is so darn rewarding.

The Globe, among many other print outlets, is looking for the defibrillator that will jolt it back to life, not seeming to understand that its resurrection is only going to last another year, maybe 3, before it finally succumbs to new media and the laws of economics.

I consider myself a devout and faithful Catholic, and I thank God that the Globe was able to expose the evil acts that were perpetrated in the Boston Catholic Church. Yes, the stories caused hurt that still lingers, but without them, who knows how long the hierarchy would continue to dupe the faithful. Keeping my fingers crossed for several more decades with of a wonderful newspaper.

"You will know the truth and the truth will set you free".
Isn't that a quote from a person who has had a great and good influence on humanity?
Truth is what the mind seeks.
Thinking Catholics will be forever grateful to Mr. Paulson for the pursuit of Truth.
Amen

It's not leftist politics, nor is it God, who is causing grief for the Globe: it's rapidly changing technology that makes print media less attractive than on-line media, along with rapidly changing expectations that drives younger consumers to the Internet rather than a folded piece of paper for the news.

God working in mysterious ways, you say? Perhaps...but if retribution were God's game, then the Globe on BDC, and BDC itself, wouldn't receive the hits it does on a daily basis.

"I have found myself wondering whether I was the only one curious about what Cardinal Bernard F. Law must be thinking..."

Paulson, for all the good work he and the Globe has done shining light into very dark places, still may have left out one crucial word: "alone". It might be inserted between "myself" and "wondering", bringing exquisite meaning to all this.. pondering.

"By all means we call down God's power on the media, particularly the Globe". First time I've heard that one. Does it really need interpretation? Law (irony of names) "calling down" the alleged power of a mythical sky god to squelch a news organization attempting to make some sense of the insanity is almost comical, if it wasn't made sad by the fact that many (fortunately dwindling) numbers of the alleged "faithful" actually give a hoot what Law thinks, even when he's sort of gone.

I'd like to read a future Globe story that questions why Law, and the rest of the organization, are not criminally liable in harbouring pedophiles and obstructing justice. That, opposed to wondering what the former boss things, would be worthy reading.

The Globe will not live or die by some myth, but by hard work, sacrifice, continued trust of its investors in the management, and appreciation (or lack thereof) of the community that it has served all these years. If it were just a matter of hocus pocus, perhaps Law would have been able to silence it a long time ago, and maybe kept his job to boot. Fortunately, and although sill incomplete (as noted above), things did not quite work out so well for Bernie.

The Globe gets its breath from a higher power: us. In this respect, it may well continue to live a long and fulfilled life.

The reason that many readers, including myself, objected to the Globe's coverage of the clergy sex abuse story was that the Globe obviously had an ulterior motive. Instead of being motivated by a desire to stop clergy sex abuse (the clergy sex abuse stopped in the 1970s; all, or almost all, the clergy sex abuse reported by the Globe in 2002-2009 occurred in the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s), the Globe was motivated by a desire to destroy or seriously hurt the Catholic Church because the Church opposed the Globe's favorite cause: same-sex marriage.

Boston is big enough to deserve two papers.

If one of those has to go, I'd vote for the Herald...it's nothing but AP clips, hyped-up headlines, and misanthropic columnists (Margery Eagan excepted).

I get that the Globe pisses off some people, but it's a FAR better publication than the Herald....it'd be a damn shame to lose it.

This is another anti-Catholic slap. Let me check my calendar to find out what beneficial program is not being covered by the media this week.

Get a freaking life already.

I have to say that this article is rather bizarre---whatever one's feeling about the Globe, there is the simply no argument to be made that the Globe did anything but righteous work in exposing the scandal and Bernie Law. The idea that anyone still argues in defense of Law or even takes the Church seriously in Boston is odd. This is not a controversy any more. The argument is dead and Law is an embarrassment. It is sort of odd to look back at as short a time ago as the early 1980s when he first came to Boston...so many people admired him and the idea that you could possibly say a bad thing about him or any Church leader in Boston's papers or on the airwaves would have been absolutely out of the question. Now he is the regular butt of off color remarks that he more than deserves.

Although the Globe should be commended for shining the spotlight on the horrible abuse scandal of the Church, nevertheless it does seem to take too much delight in any bad news about the Church, as "gaudete" said above.

"The pedephile priest story"? This is a perfect example of why people got turned off by the Globe. The Spotlight Team did a magnificent job in revealing the extent of active predator priests within the archdiocese - but only a small percentage of them were pedephiles. The John Jay independent study showed the overwhelming number of victims(over 80%) were postpubescent males and the same percent of actions were homosexual encounters. Any way look at it, the scandal was one of homosexual predator clergy and innocent vulnerable young boys. I was a 40-yr subscriber to the Globe, who eventually tired of agenda-driven "reporting", and canceled a few years back.

To: Real Large James, the Globe started at the source of the sexual victimization that was geographically closest to them. The sexually butchered children they discovered were there in Boston, in their neighborhoods, among the people they knew and to whom they (the Globe) felt responsibility. Going after the Vatican would have been foolish. But thanks to the Globe, the news that children were being sexually victimized by clergy, spread around the world and, since then, life on earth as we knew it, has never been the same; Best of all, life for the Catholic Church, and all other religions who have sexually violated children, young people and vulnerable adults, has NEVER, AND WILL NEVER BE THE SAME..So, James, now that the evidence in in, why are you not out there campaigning for the rights of children? You know where the Vatican is.....GET IT DONE! The victims and the GLOBE CAN'T DO ALL YOUR WORK FOR YOU. Comes a time you have to step up and work for a better world yourself.

Ralston et al,

there is no one who defends Card. Law's ineffective supervision of the priests' sexual abuse scandal, so that all of you who attack this point, you are attacking nada. No one is in favor of clergy sexual abuse, or the mal-supervision of it.

All Catholics agree [see my reply #3,many hours ago] that both of them were evil. The only thing we think is that the GL-obe took a perverse pleasure in 'trying'
to dance on the grave of the Catholic church, and now they, both management and workers, are meeting at a Catholic facility to iron out their differences. It is for this mean-spirited pouring salt into the well-deserved wound that they deserve derision, but the Church, ever charitable, wants this labor squabble to end, and I for one want management to give up more than they have so far. So any more anti-Catholic non-arguements are repetitions, and do not advance the discussion of this thread.

PS, even David Clohessy and al: At present, there is no more vetted profession than those current Catholic priests, who are the 97% who did not stoop to those crime/sins of the 3% of their brothers. Can you say the same of any other profession? Many weeks, we hear of teachers and coaches who have tragically abused those in their care, but virtually no priests about current parishioners. That means they have been searched, patted down, tipped upside down, and the evil boys are already in jail or otherwise out of the priesthood. So why do you, Ralson, and others continue to whine about the Catholic priesthood?
Only for one reason: you know that the Catholic church, as well as other conservative denominations, stand against the liberal agenda you cheerlead for.

Thank you Boston Globe, for helping to expose the corruption and sex abuse within the catholic church. I can speak for thousands who have been sexually abused by catholic clergy, who now, because of your hard work and courage to write that story, they have a voice. There is also hope for those who are still scared and silent to some day have the courage to speak their voice also. Just maybe God was helping you to have the courage to write your story, just maybe ....We thank you.

The Globe sees sexual abuse of children as something that Catholic priests do to children. They have largely ignored the real story... that children in this nation are abused all the time in schools, gyms, and most of all homes. The fact that the Clergy Sex Abuse scandal has captured the attention of the Globe and those who support it reeks of anti-catholicism for this reason... you have ignored the issue in every other venue. You are a champion for those who have been abused by priests. You have ignored those abused by teachers, coaches, family members and others. Truth be told, the numbers are greater in these areas, but they don't make the dramatic news that clergy sex abuse has, and they don't have organizations like SNAP dedicated to them. And Mikey, why is your beloved Globe meeting in a Catholic Parish anyway? Shame on you for that remark about the Church fire. Your true colors come shining through sometimes. Is it any wonder why some people consider you just one of the many anti-catholic bigots at the Glboe?

Do you have nothing to do with your time besides write something so pathetic as this? Cardinal Law resigned 6 1/2 years ago as a result of a scandal created by your newspaper. It's past history. Give the man a break and let him peacefully live the remaining years that God gives him. As for the Globe's woes, perhaps they might want to review your work if this is how you spend your time and this is the best you can offer. There's far more interest in religious circles than a passing quote made 17 years ago.

Bernard Law (less) is an unprosecuted, or convicted, international fugitive from justice, in the aid, abetting, enabling, perpetration of the rape, sodomoy, oral copluation, mental torture, physical maiming, kidnapping, abduction, deliquenting, hard ball litigating, murdering, obstruction of justice, perjuring, defrauding, and racketeering of many hundreds of children, while still stealing million$ from the Boston Archdiocese laity/clergy retirement monies, and living in luxury in Rome.

Bernie Law (less) is a twin poster child with Roger "Mahal" Mahony of everything WRONG, DEMONIC, FELONIOUS, ILLEGAL & EVIL with the unremoved & unpunished Roman Catholic pedo curia today; daily documented in vetted & verfied reporting at www.bishop-accountability.org/abusetracker and still costing the laity documented tens of billions of diverted offetory plate dollars, and squandered laity paid for assets.

After Cardinals Richelieu & Torquemada, Mahony and Law come in at #3 & #4 as direct agents of THE DEVIL.

THE SOLUTION? "Stop Donating Laity!" as St. Peter Damien correctly asserted.

Anyone suggesting there has be any reform or protection of children in the Roman Catholic Church is a liar, mentally ill, or a pedo criminal themselves.

The Pedo Curia is the cause of this EVIL, and all these office holders must be removed, canonically censored, and placed under Gulag-style life house arrests conditions, at a minimum!

It is the LAITY with the power to make this happen, who are the source of 99% of all Church revenues.

Edmund Burke reminds each of us: "The only condition for the triumph of evil is for good men (or women) to do nothing!"

There is no middle ground laity, you are either a financial supporter of a documented pedo curia cult, or you are not.

HOW WILL YOU ANSWER YOUR MAKER?!

Fiat Lux & Veritas!

Albino Luciani,
MURDERED POPE

David Warsh has a good point. Sure, the coverage of the abuse scandal was Pulitzer-winning, but the Globe has been coasting on that for years (the "From Our Archives" section in the right margin of your blog is one example - how many other Globe stories have permanent links seven years later?) It seems like every single article or blog post with the word "Catholic" in the byline is an attempt to win eyeballs and bring back some of that former glory. The irony is that the efforts to maintain the "award-winning" reputation turned what was good reporting into something tabloid-esque. Mentioning Cardinal Law in articles about the Globe's fiscal problems isn't too far from mentioning Angelina in a Jennifer Aniston movie review - sure, may be relevant to some extent, but as the years go by it's becoming a stretch.

The reporting and editing at the Globe have gotten pretty lousy over the years, and even as a liberal myself I think the slant has become over the top. The attrition of the best writers over the years (some voluntarily, some not) has been significant enough that in 2009 it shows in the quality of the paper as a whole.

Yes, yes, a lot of the Globe's problems have to do with the economy, changing industry, blah blah blah. But I voted with my wallet within the past few years, and it appears I'm not alone. It's a shame because I still check in occasionally online for my local news, but there you have it.

"Instead of being motivated by a desire to stop clergy sex abuse (the clergy sex abuse stopped in the 1970s . . ."

I applaud your ability to know the motives of others, however if you believe that clergy sexual abuse "stopped" in the 1970s, you are just deluding yourself.

I too have had a contentious relationship with the Globe, but their coverage of this story was their finest hour.

David Warsh is a baffoon.
Keep up the great work, Boston Globe
Hope you live for another one hundred years (and more)

I'm glad "the power of God" seemed to have brought The Globe staff to cover the priest scandal. Did God empower The Globe to do so? Law may not have really known what he was asking for. Ah, the mysteries of religion!

nice quote.
I prefer Mary Ann Glendon's formulation because it is so much more tolerant:

"I often hear it said that the Globe will receive a Pulitzer Prize for its reporting on this matter. All I can say is that if fairness and accuracy have anything to do with it, awarding the Pulitzer Prize to the Boston Globe would be like giving the Nobel Peace Prize to Osama bin Laden."

(Nov. 4, 2002, in an article from the Zenit Daily Dispatch entitled: "Mary Ann Glendon On the Reform of Lay Catholics: Where They Took A Wrong Turn – and Where There's Hope.")

everyone notice how albino luciani only has one comment, which he cuts and pastes to use every day? yawn. broken record; monomaniac.

Harrybosch et al: Catholic priests, like everyone who works sometimes with children, get CORIed every year. So if anyone is still abusing, your beef is with the inept legal system.

Another example of bias, probably subconscious, is keeping Card. Law's photo attached to this blog. It comes across as a negative commentary on every Catholic issue; is that how it's intended, Michael? Or maybe it's not your doing, but
an editor's?

Here, here guadete,

No Catholic I know defends Law. He should be in jail and hats off to the Globe
for exposing the insanity. But the Globe dismissed half the story.

Michael Rose documents how such an enviroment developed in the seminaries in his book "Goodbye, Good Men." Here are a few examples from a review, albeit a conservative review; one can find other more objective takes on this intriguing book: Rose documents that

-Seminarians and professors actually threatened physical violenceif they did not accept the gay agenda and openly, actively gay seminarians.
-"Troublemakers": the facts about how seinarians have been dismissed for accepting the Church's teachings on sexual morality.
-Catholic seminary professors who systematically taught that Catholic doctrines were false-and penalized those who defended them.
-The seminary where students wore pink silk and paraded around like the cast of La Cage Aux Folles.
-Weekend entertainment: the seminary where students were driven to a nearby city every Friday night so they could cruise the gay bars.
-The seminarian who was told to attend psychiatric courses becasue he openly
resisted gay intimidation and efforts to have homosexuality accepted at his seminary.
-Academic Standards: the seminarian who was told that if you can't say with certainty that masturbation is a positvie good then you are not suitable for ordination to the Catholic priesthood.
-The seminarian who garnared excellent evaluations from his professors for being "tolerant, flexible, and liberally-open-minded right up until the day he was arrested for corrupting morals of a minor.

The bottom line here is that the seminary became a bathhouse. And The Globe was correct, the Catholic Church is and was culpable. And this blog continues to agitate to foster the enviroment that got us into this mess.

By the way the Globe never reviewed this controversal, and despite its lack of exposure, popular book.

The Globe's reporting on the scandal helped children, and I applaud that result. What the Globe missed is that the scandal largely involved homosexual predators, as opposed to true pedophiles, and failed to provide any semblance of balance in its "reporting." For example, the Globe never reports on the astounding amount of charity work which the Catholic church, and its priests, perform on a daily basis. The Globe also seems to have ignored the historcal resistance of society as a whole to openly addressing sexual abuse of children. When it comes to sex, American society is weird, and has historically swept transgressions under the rug. This continues today, notithstanding the Globe's reporting. I also don't believe I've seen any significant reporting on other institutions which had poor records of addressing sexual abuse. NPR did a story on Hasidic Jewish Rabbis who prey on children, but I saw nothing in th Globe about that tragedy. If any reader wishes to see the Globe's anti-Catholic bias on display, go to an old-fashioned library and pull a Globe Index book from any year since 1980. Look up the key word "Catholic" and peruse the summaries of articles. Then flip to the key word "Jewish" and review those article summaries. The hatred of the Globe toward Catholics will be exposed instantly. I'm happy that the Globe's work helped expose evil individuals who betrayed the chuch and preyed on children, and the Catholic church as an institution. But I am among those who hope the Globe goes down the tubes; a victim of its liberal agenda, unfair reporting, and the economic changes affecting all newspapers.

PJM wrote "Cardinal Law resigned 6 1/2 years ago as a result of a scandal created by your newspaper. " To clarify, The Globe did not "create" the scandal; the Church did that themselves. The Globe "exposed" the scandal created by the Church.

When is the Gobe going to do a series on the implosion of main stream Protestantism?

Although I live thousands of miles away from the Globe, I have felt the impact of its reporting of the sexual abuse scandal in the Catholic Church even here in California. As a survivor myself I am eternally grateful that those courageous reporters published this horror despite the pressure from the church. Law was fearful and so, defensive. If anyone believes that God would listen to a lawless, arrogant man who knowingly allowed innocent children to have their souls slaughtered by the priests in his diocese, then they are just not willing to face the truth.

From my perspective, the Globe is guilty of covering up sexual abuse in all areas of society in the 60s and 70s. It only went after the Catholic Church after it parted ways with the Church on political issues such as busing and abortion in the mid 70s. Before then, the Globe and the Church were both together on civil rights, migrant rights, opposition to the death penalty and Vietnam.
It is also quite clear that the same type of abusive activity was going on at the WASP prep schools such as Browne and Nichols and Andover. The elite WASP institutions and perps got a free pass, because otherwise they still toed the liberal line. So, bottom-line, the Globe couldn't care less about child abuse.

this is sillyness- aren't there more substantive issues related to spirituality today that you could cover- the press has a habit of making itself the news of the day.....you are either folding or you are not...the ravings of someone who's credability even among his defenders is shot seem like REALLY old news...he should be in jail, and maybe you should be out of business.....we have moved on...times change...hello!!!!! Niether you nor he are really that relavant to most of us.....

Isn´t there no other thing to do in Boston besides criticize the priest and the Catholic Church,. You people are so ignorant and have no historical knowledge of the good that the Catholic Church did and continues to do in this world. GROW up and move on in life. Look at your own faults. Would never want to be your kid.

First, I'd like to say that I am a survivor of Clergy Sexual Abuse in Boston.

Kudos to the Boston Globe Spotlight Team on their coverage of the Clergy Sex Abuse Scandal! I'm not a believer that this coverage "drove" readers away - quite the reverse. As for the current dilemma the paper is in, I truly think that it is symptomatic of the current financial climate.

From my perspective, what was horribly alarming was NOT the Globe's coverage of the Church scandal, but the depth and breadth of the abuses foisted on innocent children. The coverage, while extensive, served to open the public's eyes to what had been going in Boston and the unbelievable extent to which the Bishops, Cardinals had knowledge of these perpetrators and did nothing but coverup.

The Globe's coverage, while devastating to digest, finally brought these crimes out into the open, and hopefully have served to protect more children in the future. I cannot describe to anyone not personally involved how torturous this period in time was for each victim. Each of us, having to digest how many victims, how many heartbreaking stories there were.

This should not be about "anti-Catholic" journalism, but about crimes committed against children, and those who were complicit.

I wish the Globe well in the future!

Jim Higgins

The Church's history of virtually always being wrong on moral issues is so so sad. The crusades, slavery, science, abortion, population growth, birth control, environment, women as priests, gay rights, child abuse... The list goes on and on with no indication of any ability to learn from past mistakes.

The Church has proven to be a dictatorship more concerned with control than anything else. I believe the church may well be the most dangerous institution on the planet. And nothing changes over 2000 years.

It saddens me so that this continues to be tolerated.

The sexual abuse of countless numbers of innocent children by pedophile priests over decades is an ABOMINATION and a CRIME.
In the "real world", these low-lifes masquerading as priests would face a criminal court, be convicted as CRIMINALS, and be doing HARD TIME in JAIL for a LONG, LONG TIME!!!

Mikey

What an amazing fact that an institution that has be so incredibly wrong on every issue known to mankind, has been the most dangerous institution on the planet, has managed to thrive for 2000 years no matter what kinds of assaults it has faced. What is it about this institution..... hmmmm?

"Catholic priests, like everyone who works sometimes with children, get CORIed every year. So if anyone is still abusing, your beef is with the inept legal system."

And not with the abusive clergy?

Fascinating.

Mike Hanauer says: "It saddens me so that this [dangerous Church] continues to be tolerated." It saddens me that YOU are so intolerant. It saddens me that you don't believe in the First Amendment. Mostly, it saddens me that you, like many of the commenters, do not know the internals of the Catholic church and other Christian churches, communities of love, rather than the externals which so perturb you.

Tumbleweed, re-read my posts. I did not defend Card. Law. He was at least
grossly negligent in his non-supervision of the criminal priests. He delegated much of that to underlings, when it was obviously something for the CEO. But it was the job of the police/DA's to charge him when they had the chance, and they decided there was no legal basis. there obviously was a moral basis. So anyone on this blog who criticizes 'those who defend Law' is criticizing zero people, because no sane person defends him, just like no sane person, especially devout Catholics, think that clergy sexual abuse of children was anything
but horrendous, disgusting, soul-destroying crimes. We totally empathize with the courageous victims who have stepped out on this blog. Every sane person, or at least I, think the Globe did a great service by their Spotlight report on clergy sexual abuse. What I and others object to is that during and after the report, the globe enjoyed the Church's pain too much, they threw salt in the grievous wounds.

I read Rose's book, and found it to be right on. But i think those problems have been largely, of course never entirely, corrected.

gaudete, I am with you. Not sure why you think I was critical.

And don't forget the horrendous ways innocent priests were treated. I am personal friends with a priest who lost everything because of an erroneous charge. He lost a vibrant parish with a school and is slander forever. The Church treated him badly only to exonerate him years later. And still he will never get his reputation back.

And what about the good priests, better people than most of us, who live in fear of putting his arm around a child. Something like 1/2 of one percent of the priests were pedophiles. And yet the irony and injustice put upon good men is palpable.

We have ourselves to blame and I pray the bishops will rid and rebuke those who support the political views of The Globe in the name of phony love and the tool of "justice" they call diversity.

KJR:

I think the word you're looking for is virulence.

Is anyone writing on here with out sin? The apparent exposure was in the best interest of cleaning up the clergy. but after it do any who wrote on here Pray?

The reporting of the abuse scandal should not bother Catholics. I am a devout Catholic, and as the saying goes, sunlight is the best disinfectant. The full, ugly story needed to be told in all of its sordid details so that changes could be made to many aspects of Diocese operations, priest recruitment and other matters, and I think that the Globe's reporting has contributed to such changes. Even as a lector, I must sign papers each year giving my parish authority to check my background for criminal records and CORI reports; such processes were not required 10 or 15 years ago. I gladly sign the consent forms each year because (1) I have absolutely nothing to hide and (2) it gives me some measure of assurance that steps are taken to avoid the horrors of sexual abuse in the Church in the future.

What bothered me, however, is that the Globe's coverage seemed to move beyond revealing the abuse scandal to what I perceived to be anti-Catholic biogtry. Thus, unrelated questions came into the picture, such as why women cannot be ordained and why priests cannot marry - issues that had nothing at all to do with the scandal. Some suggested that because priests must be celibate and cannot marry, the priests involved in this scandal were driven to pedophilia in order to relieve sexual tension. However, by that logic, celibacy leads to pedophilia, whether it involves priests or not; I think we can all agree that this is not the case. Women being ordained is also an unrelated matter. Reasonable people can disagree on whether or not women should be ordained, but it is completely unrelated to the abuse scandal.

I can't speak for all Catholics who read the Globe or post to these message boards, but I think that a lot of us saw the paper as using the abuse scandal to simply bite down harder on the Church. When the story broke, the Globe was already at odds with the Church on so many issues - abortion, same-sex marriage, adoption by same-sex couples, birth control, etc. - essentially, their "attack dogs" had already been released and bitten down on the Church. The abuse scandal simply gave the paper an excuse to lock the jaws tighter, and to this day, the Catholic Church is the only major religion that the Globe routinely criticizes for its theological doctrine. In my humble opinion, the Globe criticizes the Church because it is the best social service agency that mankind has ever known. The government cannot get out of its own way when it comes to social services, while the Church feeds more hungry, clothes more naked, houses more homeless, counsels the spiritually ill, assists the handicapped and educates people in its schools far better than any government institution ever could, or ever will.

Harrybosch et al,

Name one Catholic priest who is still abusing kids. If you can't, you're bluffing, and making serious unsupported allegations and just showing your prejudice.

I'm so tired of all this whining about how the Globe is against the Catholic Church. Not only does such a claim invalidate the opinions of any Catholic who DOES like reading the Globe, or any Catholics involved in writing the Globe, but it also helps maintain a false "battle" between supposed "liberalism" and religion.

Children were being abused and molested by people in power who happened to gain their power from the Catholic Church. The fact that the Globe's journalists investigated and exposed this violence is a GOOD THING. Would you rather have children raped and abused simply so you can be fooled into thinking that everyone in the Catholic Church is perfect?

Also, as has BARELY been mentioned, the reason why the Globe and plenty of other papers have been suffering financially is because of the availability of free news online. It's not because of God. It's not because of the scandal. It's because of what we're doing now: accessing the Globe through the internet and not paying to read it. This article isn't claiming that there are religious reasons for the Globe's financial issues; it is simply pointing out some interesting coincidences between what Law has said, what is happening, and where negotiations are taking place.

Get over it. Catholics aren't the only people (or the only religious people) in the city.

MSF - to clarify ... there were TWO scandals. The first was the clergy sex abuse scandal, a sad and horrific chapter in the Church's history, not only in Boston, but in the United States, and indeed the world. The second scandal, was the Globe's successful attempt to bring down Cardinal Law, something it has sought to do for many years. Cardinal Law was the fall guy for a situation far greater than his control, in places far beyond his jurisdiction as Archbishop of Boston.

To PJM: You are incorrect in saying that the clergy abuse situation is "past history." (By the way, all history is "past.") Victims continue to come forward in this country and around the world. Many abusing priests have not been brought to justice. The bishops who protected those priests have not been held accountable. Many victims continue to struggle daily with the emotional, psychological, spiritual and physical consequences of having been sexually abused by a priest. It is far from over, as much as you might want to wish it all away.

To Ray Neary: It makes no difference if clergy abuse victims are male, female, very young or "postpubescent." It matters not if the predator priests are gay, straight or bi-sexual. In every case it is a crime. Every case is an abuse of power, a betrayal of trust. Every abuser is equally responsible. Rape is rape. It is not a homosexual issue. Do you blame heterosexuality for the thousands of girls who were abused by priests? The ONLY important point is that thousands of Catholic priests sexually abused tens of thousands of children and the hierarchy knowingly protected those priests.

To David: Where did you get the idea that "clergy abuse stopped in the 1970's?" There is no factual evidence to support your claim. It is common for those sexually abused by priests as children to wait years, often decades, before telling of the abuse. (There are many reasons why this is the case.) Victims continue to come forward, and may come forward for decades to come. I personally know victims who were abused in the 1980's, 1990's and 2000's, though most are not yet ready to speak publicly of the abuse.

To gaudete & tumbleweed: You both indicated that nobody defends Bernard Law. That is inaccurate. One example, there is a post from PJM here which says: "Give the man a break and let him peacefully live the remaining years that God gives him." And I have heard that sentiment expressed previously by others as well.

Christine, I said that no sane person defends B. Law for his maladministration of the criminal priests. By definition, if PJM said what you say he said, then he is not sane. If you have indeed heard that sentiment expressed by others as well, then you should ignore them as simpletons, and only listen to tumbleweed and me. bon soir.

"...I think that a lot of us saw the paper as using the abuse scandal to simply bite down harder on the Church. ..... The abuse scandal simply gave the paper an excuse to lock the jaws tighter, and to this day, the Catholic Church is the only major religion that the Globe routinely criticizes for its theological doctrine...."
cububaby, yours is one of the best posts here. nice job! but, I think I can suggest a reason for the Globe's persistence. Boston is still heavily Catholic.

Church officials don't just dislike free speech - they hate it, and actively promote ways to keep the laity from speaking out. not just on the abuse issue - on any issue. Any real church-going Catholic knows this in their bones. You need only pick up a few issues of the Pilot or the Catholic Observer (here in the Springfield Diocese) to get clued in. As long as this disrespect for the civil rights and public opinion of the rank and file Catholic is in place, you will continue to see righteous indignation and investigative reporting bubble over into the public sphere.

gaudette,
Your comment at 55 is pointless, my friend. To me it ties back to the argument about why the RCC is the focus and not the molestation of children in schools, etc. The difference is that in the schools when a teacher is caught they are outed, not transferred and their crimes hidden, where the culture of the RC hierarchy led to pedophiles being drawn to it, where they were enabled, protected and trusted because they were seen as "holy." Just because no names have come out recently doesn't mean Harry or anyone else needs to be able to tell you who is still molesting. They got away with it for so long because it was kept hidden. Currently, if someone is accused the reaction on the part of the RCC is swift. That is good. That does not mean it is currently 1200% effective. It is also true that people frequently struggle with shame after being molested or abused, and don't come forward immediately... It took me almost a decade to admit what had happened to me to myself. I cannot tell you who is currently still abusing, but that does not mean it isn't happening. To claim otherwise is a specious argument.

David, @ 17, your ignorance is astounding.
The abuse stopped in the 70s? I was abused up through the mid 80s. You haven't been paying attention if you think it all stopped then. Remember that it is sometimes years before a victim comes forward. It takes guts for a 12 year old to step up and say, "A priest was touching me wrong." Sometimes it is such a horrifying experience that it is years before a victim can step forward. Many of the stories that came out were from the 50s to the 70s, but there were many others who molested into the 80s and 90s. Remember, a pedophile doesn't retire. What do you think happened? Oh... it's 1980 ... time to stop. They don't stop unless stopped. Maybe now they have been. It is far too early to tell, but you really need a reality check.

In any institution where adults and children intermingle there will be abuse. Sin is a part of being human and that will not change until Jesus returns and judges the living and the dead. The good news is unlike what I feel occurred years ago, young men entering the seminary will be those clearly called by God to this vocation. Based on recent history no one except those that are clearly called would want to become a Priest. I spend most of my free time in an incredibly active youth apostolate for a wonderful parish. I believe the younge currently in semenaries and those discerning it are much more orthdox and comitted to the Truth of the Cathholic Church. I believe the process of increased number of Priest vocations although slow will be steady and as always the Church will bounce back stronger then ever. As I've heard a couple priests say lately, we don't need anymore mediocre Priests It's either that or make sure your ready for Jesus 2nd coming.

To the person who inquired about peoples prayer life good job. You seldom hear anyone on this board discuss how important daily prayer including scripture, Mass and the Sacraments are.

Kai, amigo,

Again, I cannot say enough how i admire you and the other victims who have written on this thread about their personal pain due to clergy sexual abuse. But (you knew there was a but coming) I'm afraid it is yours which is the specious argument. Yours is what we call an argument ex silentio, from silence. 'I don't hear the kids yelling, so they must be sleeping.' Not necessarily; the 2nd clause doesn't follow from the first, just like 'some priests must or probably are stil abusing' doesn't follow from 'just because we don't hear about it.' If anything, given all the highly justified publicity about the scandal, i would think it more likely that we would hear about it quicker now than in decades past. Granted, what happened to you into the mid 80's was a disgusting crime, it was over 20 years ago, which is not to ignore your pain, but just again to set the historical context. I think you know that David meant 'virtually' all the cases were from the 50's-70's, not every single one. One can only write so many words on each post. Just like I'm not saying absolutely no clergy abuse is now occurring; how could you, or I know that? Also, just as our American legal system is built on 'innocent until
proven guilty' for the individual, so it should be applied to the vast majority of clergy Catholic or otherwise.

And I most emphatically agree with you on what you wrote about the "culture of the RC hierarchy." But i hope, and from what i can observe, that culture has been repudiated and changed--of course, never perfectly here on earth.

tumble: You are absolutely incorrect when saying "....1/2 of one percent of priests were pedophiles." Please, do your research. It appears that you are rewriting history in order to defend the church. And you fail to mention the extensive, decades-long, cover-up by the hierarchy. The church leadership protected the priests and their organization rather than protecting the children. How do you defend that?

You comment that "good" priests are "better people than most of us." This is exactly the type of dangerous thinking which contributed to the clergy abuse crisis. People put priests on a pedestal, trusting them totally, ignoring the fact that they are simply human. And the abusing priests deliberately took advantage of that trust. Many abused children who told their parents of the abuse were not believed and/or were punished for saying such a thing about a priest. And victims who come forward as adults are still often not believed by some Catholics who refuse to accept reality when it comes to clergy abuse.

RobertMKelly,

I disagree with you on the Church and freedom of speech. The only types of speech that the Church is not thrilled about are heresy, someone teaching something contrary to the Catholic faith, and schism, intentionally trying to lead others to leave the Church, breakiing up the family, the Body of Christ. Obviously there is nothing Church leaders can do about people saying those things in their own private life or in the public media, but that doesn't mean the Church should give people a platform to contradict salvific truth's in the Church's media.

And yet, if you ever read the Pilot, for instance, i'm frequently surprised at some of the letters to the editor they publish, critical of church policies or leadership, and also some articles, like by Douglas Kmiec, the pro-Obama law professor.

To the nameless person who wrote post #44:
Yes, the church has done much good. That fact doesn't minimize the fact that thousands of priests sexually abused tens of thousands of kids (and those are only the cases we know about, many victims never come forward). That good work doesn't take away the fact that the hierarchy deliberately covered up the abuse. And you urge those who speak up against the on-going clergy abuse crisis to look at their own "faults." Raping kids is not a fault, it's a crime, one of the worst possible crimes in our society. We all have faults, but few of us rape kids and protect rapists.

Dear Kai, You are exactly right. One major difference between abuse in the Catholic church and other organizations is that the church leaders knew of the abuse for decades and deliberately covered it up. They didn't report the abuse to legal authorities; moved abusing priests around; gave them good recommendations; promised parents that the priests would be removed and broke that promise; threatened parents and victims; etc. And they continue to fight victims in court and dismiss credible cases.

I don't know of any school system, for example, where thousands of teachers have abused tens of thousands of kids while the principals and superintendents hid the abuse and behaved as the chuch leaders did. When a teacher is credibly accused of sexually abusing a student, typically that teacher is reported, arrested, suspended, etc. There is no comparison. I'm sure that if the Globe learned of a massive cover-up of abuse in the schools, they would be all over that story.

And as you and I know from personal experience, victims of abuse by a priest are often treated differently than other abuse victims. We frequently see Catholics supporting the priests, and turning on the victims, even when there is clear evidence of abuse. We see people, for example on this blog, going to any length to deny, minimize, and excuse the clergy abuse situation. We see them blaming the messenger, the Globe, when they don't like the message. I would challenge those who say the Globe is guilty of Catholic-bashing (for their clergy abuse reporting) to go out and find ample, credible evidence of comparable sexual abuse and an extensive cover-up in another Massachusetts organization. Take that evidence to the Globe and see what happens.

gaudete, one thought....
As mentioned in a previous post, I personally know people who were abused by Catholic priests in the 1990's and 2000's. One example, I just learned of a
13-year-old girl who was being raped by a priest for the past two years. She just found the courage to tell someone. (And much of the congregation rallied around the priest and ostracized this girl and her family.) Having been raped by a priest myself and having been public about that, people often tell me that they were also abused though they are not public about it. And as mentioned, some of those people are relatively young and the abuse happened not that long ago. While I don't believe that the numbers of children being abused by priests is anywhere near those abused decades ago, I also know that the abuse has not ended.

PJM - Thank you for the clarification. You wrote: “The second scandal, was the Globe's successful attempt to bring down Cardinal Law, something it has sought to do for many years.” So you consider it a scandal to expose a person who causes scandal? Bernard Law is responsible for his own descent (as much as the Globe might like to take credit). The media exposed what none of us wanted to believe; he not only knowingly allowed, but through the sin of omission, encouraged harm to come to members of the flock he was entrusted to Sheppard. That is unthinkably evil.

Gaudete,

you talk about "the Church's media" as if its all about them (the official church). this implies to me that its very important to you that you defend their right to defend the faith. your insistence and concentration on doctrainaire concepts like heresy, schism, breaking up the family and so forth are yet another symptom.

Gaudete, all of that is beside the point. "media" means both ways. it is just as important for the laity as it is for the clergy. free speech means free speech, with no equivocation. that is what we do not have in the Catholic chuch, and I maintain that this is one of the main reasons why you see so much Cathlolic laundry out and about in the alleys of the public square. its because we are not allowed to air our laundry at home.

A final thought....to David and those who believe that sexual abuse by priests stopped many decades ago.....Looking over media reports from just the last two days, I read several articles regarding credible accusations of abuse which took place from 1983 through the mid-1990's.

Also, great point MSF! And those who blame the Globe for Law's troubles apparently forget that a group of over 50 priests publicly said he needed to resign, as did many Catholics, victims, other media outlets, and members of the general public. (In my view, no one group alone is responsible for his resignation, though many groups do like to take credit!) As you said, Law is responsible for his own descent. Unfortunately, he has yet to be punished or held accountable by the hierarchy. The hierarchy is protecting Law just as Law protected the predator priests.

Christine,
I agree completely! Some people will only believe what they want to believe. Let’s not forget about Christopher Reardon, who although not a priest, ran the CCD and Youth Ministry programs, as well as the altar boys at St. Agnes Church in Middleton, MA. He pleaded guilty to 75 counts, including rape, indecent assault and battery on a child and disseminating pornography. The abuse took place in the 90’s and into 2000 when he was arrested in what turned out to be the largest prosecution of a child sexual abuse case in MA history. That situation was made even more appalling by the fact that the pastor there at the time, Rev. Jon Martin, was so busy trying to hide his own homosexual escapades that he claimed he knew nothing about Reardon’s actions. Talk about the blind leading the blind!

As to Bernard Law not being punished - that has been one of the most difficult aspects to understand. The fact that he maintains the title of Cardinal is a slap in the face not only to the victims, but to all Catholics. From what I understand, the reason he has not been demoted is because he was just following orders form his superiors (then Cardinal Ratzinger – now Pope Benedict XVI, and yes, we hate to admit this one, but also JPII) How could they punish him for following orders? That is why he is still a Cardinal and living in Rome. The tradition of protecting “bad” priests is once again carried on. The evil goes all the way to the top and until the Church finally comes clean and actually becomes honest, it will continue to crumble and lose members.

MSF: Ah, yes, Jon Martin. I worked with him at a camp for special needs children from 1974-1984. We learned later that nine priests from that camp had been credibly, publicly, accused of sexual abuse of children. The hypocrisy alone is staggering. Some of those priests I knew from camp are now in jail.

Yup, following orders to protect rapists! Now that's loyality. I agree, the evil goes all the way to the top.

The Boston Globe singlehandedly changed the status of children in America. Because of its coverage, we all know now, all of us in America, that children are living, breathing beings who must be protected from predators. The Boston Globe set into motion a paradigm-changing movement to expose what's been happening to children, abuses so corrupt and inconceivable and prevalent that every Catholic Diocese in the nation has been forced, kicking and screaming, into acknowledging that children have dignity and are worth more than simply being used as fodder for sex-starved priests. The long-term impact on our society of restoring innocence to children is incalculable. The Boston Globe has had more to do with bettering our society than any publication in the history of America. Nothing can or will ever change that legacy.

Hi Michael, All,

SubT: Yes the Wrath of GOD is at play
I just read the Globe Sunday and found the short version of this article by M.P.
There are many good comments whose opinions on the Abuse situation mostly mirror my own emotions and analysis. That being said, I want to come back to M.P's initial points and maybe thoughts "What would Law think" and is "The Globe's situation The Wrath of GOD"

I can guess what Law might be thinking yet don't know since he certainly seemed ill equipped to handle the public and press outcry during the Globe's extensive mostly negative coverage. Yet if we read the bible stories mostly in the early testaments we certainly can say the wrath of GOD was at play. Two points to support this position a) If the Globe had created a SpotLight Team to investigate the Globe's financial status and engage, enrage the readership would WE (Globe and Us) be here today b) Did the Globe build GOD or remove people from GOD by it's coverage.

Hi Again MikeP, ALL,

STitle: David Walsh is Spot On (mostly)

One last post as I reread many great comments and the initial blog entry. David Walsh is Spot On. A very short quote pull yet concisely and well written. Balancing the needs of the customers, the needs of the stockholders, and the needs of management, employees and downline contributors is a tricky balancing act. When the balance is off a FALL or maybe a Stumble occurs.

I do not believe, of course, that the Globe's woes have anything to do with the wrath of God. However, there is a strange irony in the fact that The Globe's projected deficit for the current fiscal year - 85 miillion dollars - is the exact same amount of the media settlements of the archdiocese of Boston in the year of the Globe's witch hunt against Catholic priests. The coincidence was a bit much and perhaps God and irony are not mutually exclusive. In the end I think we all have to ask whether the Globe really served the city of Boston and its citizens with its relentless pummeling of what was claimed to have gone on among Catholic priests decades ago, while at the same time ignoring the plight of sexually abused children in the here and now. I, for one, do not believe the Globe provided a credible service to the community. What would make it credible is for the Globe's spotlight team to conduct the same sort of expose in the educational community where, it has been shown, children remain at far greater risk.

Back in 2003 The Globe reported on a story about a man who was charged with extortion for attempting to blackmail a Boston area priest. I am aware that the Globe was notified that the extortionist, under another name, had obtained settlements by accusing more than one priest in a neighboring diocese. The Globe reporters never responded and had no interest in reporting on what was clearly going to be a case of fraud against the Catholic Church. It is perhaps the Globe's own unilateral arrogance that is its demise.

Hi Ryan,

OK one more post.

"Back in 2003 The Globe reported on a story about a man who was charged with extortion for attempting to blackmail a Boston area priest. o - o - o "

An excellent point. This aspect was under reported and mostly a sidebar in their reporting. During the course of the Spotlight team’s through old stuff rehashing investigation they also missed their own complacency and even support for homosexual/anyoldgender leadership in all aspects of life. When the RCC finally decided to remove homosexual leaning priests the Globe was again negative towards the RCC.

The Wrath of GOD is complex and often means being consistent with your touted values. When you do not help your enemy pick up their ox after it falls you may suffer the Wrath of GOD.

Yours in Greater Boston, MANY_MrDave
P.S. This Friday on Greater Boston (WGBH-Emily Rooney) there was a good piece about the media's compacency to IT's problems and both the NYT and the Globe's reporting