BishopAccountability.org
	Priest-Abuse Report Far from a Whitewash By Gregory Erlandson Journal Gazette June 7, 2011 http://www.journalgazette.net/article/20110607/EDIT05/306079988/1147/EDIT07 Judging from the reaction of critics such as Anson Shupe ("Church abuse report ultimately unenlightening," May 30) to the long-awaited John Jay report on the "context and causes" of the clergy sexual abuse crisis, Catholics may be forgiven for believing in a new adage: No responsible deed goes unpunished. The study – which took five years and almost $2 million to complete – was requested by the U.S. bishops, who also funded half of its cost. It was conducted by the John Jay College for Criminal Justice in New York. What should be seen as a ground-breaking effort at institutional transparency and self-criticism, however, has too easily been dismissed, ridiculed, and even seen as further evidence of a cover-up. Last week's column by Shupe is an example of the unfair and misleading commentary on this report. In a detailed and exhaustive review of the abuse cases of the last 50 years involving 4 percent of that era's Catholic priests, the John Jay researchers found that the number of abuse cases peaked in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Annual audits show that new incidents of clergy abuse have dramatically dropped to single digits annually. Despite this data, Shupe alleged that priestly abuse cases continue "unabated." His scholarly evidence: "Check the Internet." Contrary to Shupe's assertion, the report does not seek to blame "Woodstock" for the crisis. In fact, it examines a wide variety of causes, ranging from poor seminary screening and formation, crippled psycho-sexual development, lack of proper safeguards and controls, and, yes, a general shift in the cultural climate regarding a host of sexual practices and behavior. Anyone who looks at the increase in pre-marital and extra-marital sexual behavior, pornography use and the rise in many sexually deviant behaviors over the past 40 years would have a hard time denying that a cultural tsunami had slammed into Western society, including the United States. Despite Shupe's assertion to the contrary, the report does examine the record of the bishops in addressing the scandal, noting the efforts that failed as well as the dioceses that did make significant steps to address the problem early on. A section of the report looks at the church's efforts, and notes "the failure of some … leaders to take responsibility for the harms of the abuse by priests was egregious in some cases." What is most striking in Shupe's critique is that he seems intent on treating the sexual abuse of minors as solely a Catholic problem. But the John Jay authors underscore what many other studies have concluded: The sexual abuse of minors is widespread in society, and many organizations have struggled with this problem, from public schools and the Boy Scouts to Big Brothers Big Sisters and youth athletics. But, the report's authors observed, "No other institution has undertaken a public study of sexual abuse and, as a result, there are no comparable data to those collected and reported by the Catholic Church." The church is not perfect, nor is it "done" with the crisis. It will be living with the implications of both the deviant actions and failed leadership of some of its clergy for a generation or more. Unless one is willing to argue that the estimated 200,000 children abused every year in this country are only victims of Catholic priests, however, I believe that the lasting scandal is that we remain blind to the real scale of this epidemic in our community and nation.
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.